A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success with Melissa Koenig
Session Handouts
Melissa Koenig Principal, Alamo Elementary Phone: (269) 692-6149
[email protected]
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success Session Handouts & Tools 1. 2.
ASCD Recommended Minutes of Instruction Crunch the Numbers a. Teacher A Schedule – to calculate a week’s worth of instructional minutes & compare to ASCD’s recommendations b. Teacher A Schedule KEY c. Teacher B Schedule - to calculate a week’s worth of instructional minutes & compare to ASCD’s recommendations d. Teacher B Schedule KEY e. Teacher C Schedule - to calculate a week’s worth of instructional minutes & compare to ASCD’s recommendations f. Teacher C Schedule KEY 3. Principal Self-Assessment 4. Problems Teachers Face – Teacher Self-Assessment 5. Writing Program Evaluation Questions – Determining Needs Checklist 6. PARCC Sample Questions for 3rd & 7th grade 7. Writing Program Evaluation – Blank Template 8. WriteSteps Sample Pack 9. Practice Page – Writing Program Evaluation 10. 3-2-1 Summarization Activity 11. IESD’s White Paper – Elementary Writing Programs – How they match the research and the Common Core. 12. Speaker/Presentation Evaluation – turn this in for your chance to be entered in a drawing to win a full year’s subscription to a CCSS writing program!
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
ASCD Recommended Minutes of Instruction Content Area
Primary Grades
Upper Elementary
(1-3)
(4-6) (7-8 self contained)
Daily
Weekly
Daily
Weekly
Reading
90 minutes
450 minutes
60 minutes
300 minutes
Writing & Grammar
60 minutes
300 minutes
60 minutes
300 minutes
Math
60 minutes
300 minutes
60 minutes
300 minutes
Science
30 minutes
150 minutes
40 minutes
200 minutes
Social Studies
30 minutes
150 minutes
40 minutes
200 minutes
Totals
270 minutes
1350 minutes
260 minutes
1300 minutes
ASCD.ORG: Fisher, Jan, Hoover, Ginny, and Joyce Mcleod. “Chapter 2: Managing Instructional Time.” Key Elements of Classroom Management. New York: ASCD, 2010. Web. 24 Feb. 2014
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
WriteSteps understands that the process of learning to write and the ability to write using conventions of standard English grammar are important. WriteSteps has developed daily lesson plans that allow for adequate time to teach quality writing skills while being conscious that teachers also need time to teach isolated grammar and language skills.
WriteSteps Recommended Minutes of Writing Instruction K-1 – 50 minutes 3 X’s a week 2-5 – 50 minutes 4 X’s a week
Until we can manage TIME, we can manage nothing else. Peter F. Drucker (1954)
By not consuming the entire 300 weekly minutes of writing and grammar instruction, the classroom teacher can be assured there will be time to focus on grammar and language skills.
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success Teacher A – 1st Grade Monday
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Morning Meeting & Calendar 8:20 – 8:40
Morning Meeting & Calendar 8:20 – 8:40
Morning Meeting & Calendar 8:20 – 8:40
Whole Group Math 8:45 – 9:05
Whole Group Math 8:45 – 9:05
Independent/ Small Group Math 9:10 – 10:00
Math Centers 9:10 – 10:00
Morning Meeting & Calendar 8:20 – 8:40
ART 8:20 – 9:10
Whole Group Math 8:45 – 9:15
Whole Group Math 9:10 – 9:40
Math Centers 9:20 – 9:50
Independent/ Small Group Math 9:45 – 10:15
Phonics Dance 9:40 – 10:00
Phonics Dance Word Work 10:00 – 10:20
Phonics Dance Word Work 10:20 – 10:40
Reading Activity Big Book Poetry 10:05 – 10:35
Music 10:10 – 10:40
Phonics Dance Word Work 10:10 – 10:30
Read Aloud & Comprehension Strategies 10:25 – 10:55 Reading Groups 11:00 – 11:50
Read Aloud & Comprehension Strategies 10:45 – 11:15 Book Boxes Read to Self & Read to a Partner 11:20 – 11:50
Listen to Reading 10:40-11:00
Library 10:45 – 11:15
Listen to Reading 10:40 – 11:10
Reading Groups 11:00 – 11:50
Book Boxes Read to Self & Read to a Partner 11:20 – 11:50
Read Aloud & Comprehension Strategies 11:15 – 11:50
GYM 8:45 – 9:35
Lunch & Recess 12:00 – 12:40 Bathroom Break 12:40 – 12:55 Music 1:00 – 1:30
Letter of the Week 1:00 – 1:20
Writing Workshop 1:35 – 2:10
Computer Lab 1:25 – 1:55
Science/Social Studies Lesson 2:15-3:00
Writing Workshop 2:00 – 2:35 Afternoon Meeting 2:40 – 3:00
Whole Group Math 1:00 – 1:30
Math Centers 1:35 – 2:05 Science or Social Studies Lab 2:10-2:50
Letter of the Week 1:00 – 1:20 3rd /4th grade reading buddies 1:05 – 1:45 Writing Workshop 1:50 – 2:25 Science/Social Studies Lesson 2:30 – 3:00
GYM 1:00 – 1:40 Spelling Test 1:50 – 2:20 Community Building/ Peace Making 2:25 – 3:00
Directions: Calculate how much time is spent on each subject for the week. Record your answers below: Math: _____________________ Science: _______________ Social Studies: ______________ Reading/Phonics/Spelling: __________________Writing w/Instruction & Grammar: __________________
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success Teacher A – 1st Grade Monday Morning Meeting & Calendar 8:20 – 8:40 Whole Group Math 8:45 – 9:15
Tuesday ART 8:20 – 9:10 Whole Group Math 9:10 – 9:40
KEY
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Morning Meeting & Calendar 8:20 – 8:40 GYM 8:45 – 9:35
Morning Meeting & Calendar 8:20 – 8:40 Whole Group Math 8:45 – 9:05
Morning Meeting & Calendar 8:20 – 8:40 Whole Group Math 8:45 – 9:05
Math Centers 9:20 – 9:50
Independent/Small Group Math 9:45 – 10:15
Phonics Dance 9:40 – 10:00
Independent/Small Group Math 9:10 – 10:00
Math Centers 9:10 – 10:00
Phonics Dance Word Work 10:00 – 10:20
Phonics Dance Word Work 10:20 – 10:40
Reading Activity Big Book Poetry 10:05 – 10:35
Music 10:10 – 10:40
Phonics Dance Word Work 10:10 – 10:30
Read Aloud & Comprehension Strategies 10:25 – 10:55 Reading Groups 11:00 – 11:50
Read Aloud & Comprehension Listen to Reading Library Strategies 10:40-11:00 10:45 – 11:15 10:45 – 11:15 Book Boxes Book Boxes Read to Self & Reading Groups Read to Self & Read Read to a Partner 11:00 – 11:50 to a Partner 11:20 – 11:50 11:20 – 11:50 Lunch & Recess 12:00 – 12:40 Bathroom Break 12:40 – 12:55
Music 1:00 – 1:30
Letter of the Week 1:00 – 1:20
Whole Group Math 1:00 – 1:30
Writing Workshop 1:35 – 2:10
Computer Lab 1:25 – 1:55
Math Centers 1:35 – 2:05
Science/ Social Studies Lesson 2:15-3:00
Writing Workshop 2:00 – 2:35 Afternoon Meeting 2:40 – 3:00
Science or Social Studies Lab 2:10-2:50
Letter of the Week 1:00 – 1:20 3rd /4th grade reading buddies 1:05 – 1:45 Writing Workshop 1:50 – 2:25 Science/Social Studies Lesson 2:30 – 3:00
Listen to Reading 10:40 – 11:10 Read Aloud & Comprehension Strategies 11:15 – 11:50
GYM 1:00 – 1:40 Spelling Test 1:50 – 2:20 Community Building/ Peace Making 2:25 – 3:00
Directions: Calculate how much time is spent on each subject for the week. Record your answers below: Math: 300 minutes weekly Science: 150 minutes weekly combined w/ SS Social Studies: _______ Reading/Phonics/Spelling: 515 minutes weekly Writing w/Instruction & Grammar: 105 minutes weekly
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
Teacher B – 4th Grade Week of ________________________________ Monday Journal Write 8:20 – 8:40
Tuesday Library 8:20 – 9:00
Wednesday Journal Write 8:20 – 8:40
Friday
Journal Write 8:20 – 8:40
Daily Language Review 8:20 – 8:40
D5- Spelling and Word Work 9:05-9:30
D5- Spelling and Word Work 9:05-9:30
D5 –Work on Writing 9:35-10:00
D5 –Work on Writing 9:35-10:00
D5- Shared Reading 10:05-10:30
D5- Shared Reading 10:05-10:30
D5- Whole Group Reading 10:00-10:30
Daily Language Review 8:40 – 9:00 D5- Spelling and Word Work 9:05-9:30 D5 – Work on Writing 9:35 – 10:00 D5 – Whole Group Reading 10:05 – 10:30
D5- Reading Comprehension 10:35-11:00 D5 – Read to Self 11:05-11:25
D5- Reading Comprehension 10:35-11:00 D5 – Fluency Stories 11:05 – 11:25
D5- Reading Comprehension 10:35-11:00 D5 – Read to Self 11:05-11:25
D5 – Reading Comprehension 10:35 – 11:00 D5 – Fluency Stories 11:05 – 11:25
Daily Language Review 8:40 – 9:00
Daily Language Review 8:40 – 9:00
Thursday
Computer Lab 9:05 – 9:55
Spelling Test 8:45 – 9:25 Score Together D5 – Work on Writing 9:35 – 10:00 D5 – Shared Reading 10:05 – 10:30
D5 – Read to Self & Poetry Boxes 10:35 – 11:25
Lunch 11:30 – 12:05 Recess 12:05 – 12:20 Math 12:25 – 1:15 Brain Gym 1:15 – 1:30 Science 1:35-2:25
Math 12:25 – 1:15 iPod math games 1:15 – 1:30
Math 12:25 – 1:15 Brain Gym 1:25 – 1:45
Math 12:25 – 1:45
PTO Assembly Social Studies Science 1:50 – 2:30 1:50-2:40 1:50-2:40 Specials 2:45 – 3:30 PE/Music/Art
Math 12:25 – 1:15 iPod math games 1:20 -1:45 Science 1:50 – 2:40
Directions: Calculate how much time is spent on each subject for the week. Record your answers below: Math:________________ Science & Social Studies:_____________ Reading/Phonics:_________________ Spelling/Grammar: _____________ Writing:______________
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success Teacher B – 4th Grade
KEY
Week of ________________________________ Monday Rocket Math 8:20 – 8:40 Social Studies 8:40 – 9:30
Tuesday
Wednesday
Thursday
Friday
Library 8:20 – 9:00
Rocket Math 8:20 – 8:40 Grammar Review 8:40 – 9:00
Social Studies 8:20 – 9:00
Grammar Review 8:20 – 8:40
Writing 9:35-10:00
Spelling and Word Work 9:05-9:30 Writing 9:35-10:00
Computer Lab 9:05 – 9:55
Shared Reading 10:05-10:30
Shared Reading 10:05-10:30
D5- Whole Group Reading 10:00-10:30
Spelling and Word Work 9:05-9:30 Writing 9:35 – 10:00 Whole Group Reading 10:05 – 10:30
Reading Comprehension 10:35-11:00 Read to Self 11:05-11:25
Reading Comprehension 10:35-11:00 Fluency Stories 11:05 – 11:25
Reading Comprehension 10:35-11:00 Read to Self 11:05-11:25
Reading Comprehension 10:35 – 11:00 Fluency Stories 11:05 – 11:25
Spelling Test 8:45 – 9:25 Score Together Writing 9:35 – 10:00 Shared Reading 10:05 – 10:30
Read to Self & Poetry Boxes 10:35 – 11:25
Lunch 11:30 – 12:05 Recess 12:05 – 12:20 Math 12:25 – 1:30
Math 12:25 – 1:15 iPod math games 1:15 – 1:30
Science 1:35-2:25
Social Studies 1:50-2:40
Math 12:25 – 1:45 Science 1:50-2:40
Math 12:25 – 1:45
Reading Buddies 1:55 – 2:30
Math 12:25 – 1:15 iPod math games 1:20 -1:45 Science 1:50 – 2:40
Specials 2:45 – 3:30 PE/Music/Art Directions: Calculate how much time is spent on each subject for the week. Record your answers below: Math: 410 minutes weekly Science: 150 minutes weekly Reading/Phonics/Spelling: 540 minutes weekly Writing w/Instruction & Grammar: 135 minutes weekly
Social Studies: 140 minutes weekly
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
Teacher C – 2nd Grade Monday Writer’s Workshop 8:30 – 9: 15
Music 9:25 – 9:55 Grammar Warm-Up 10:00 – 10:20 *D5- Reading Comprehension 10:30-11:00 *D5- Reading Comprehension 11:00-11:30
Tuesday Grammar Warm-Up 8:30 – 8:50 Writers Workshop 8:55-9:35
Wednesday Morning Work 8:30-8:45 Mad Minutes Writers Workshop 8:50-9:30
*D5- Shared Reading 9:50-10:20
Editing Practice 9:35 – 9:55 *D5- Read to Self 10:00-10:30
*D5- Reading Comprehension 10:25-10:55 *D5- Book Clubs 11:00 – 11:30
*D5- Reading Comprehension 10:35-11:05 *D5 – Spelling and Word Work 11:05 – 11:30
Thursday Morning Work 8:30 – 9:00 National Geographic *D5 – Listen to Reading ipod centers 9:05 – 9:35 *D5 – Shared Reading 9:40 – 10:10 *D5 – Reading Comprehension 10:15 – 10:45
ART
Friday Grammar Warm-Up 8:30 – 8:50 Writer’s Workshop 8:30 – 9:10 *D5 Spelling (Test) 9:15 – 9:45 *D5 – Book Clubs 9:50 – 10:20 *D5 – Reading Comprehension 10:25 – 10:55 *D5 – Read to Self 11:00 – 11:30
10:50 –11:30
*D5 - represents Daily 5 Reading Workshop
Lunch & Recess 11:40-12:20 Bathroom Break 12:20 – 12:30 Math 12:35-1:35
Math 12:35-1:35
Math 12:35-1:35
Math 12:35 – 1:35
Math 12:35 – 1:35
*D5 – Read to Self 1:40 – 2:00 *D5 – Spelling and Word Work 2:05 – 2:20
Science 1:40 – 2:40
Science Lab 1:40 – 2: 10 Social Studies 2:15-2:45
Social Studies 1:40 – 2:40
Social Studies 1:40 – 2:10 Writing Author Share 2:15 – 2:45
Science 2:25 – 3:25
Library 2:45 – 3:20
PE 2:50 – 3:20
Writer’s Workshop 2:45 – 3: 30
PE 2:50 – 3:20
Directions: Calculate how much time is spent on each subject for the week. Record your answers below: Math:_____________________ Science: _______________ Social Studies:______________ Reading/Phonics/Spelling:______________ Writing w/Instruction & Grammar:____________________
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success Teacher C – 2nd Grade Monday
Writers Workshop 8:55-9:35
Wednesday Morning Work 8:30-8:45 Mad Minutes Writers Workshop 8:50-9:30
Grammar Warm-Up 10:00 – 10:20
*D5- Shared Reading 9:50-10:20
Editing Practice 9:35 – 9:55 *D5- Read to Self 10:00-10:30
*D5- Reading Comprehension 10:30-11:00 *D5- Reading Comprehension 11:00-11:30
*D5- Reading Comprehension 10:25-10:55 *D5- Book Clubs 11:00 – 11:30
Writer’s Workshop 8:30 – 9: 15
Music 9:25 – 9:55
Tuesday Grammar Warm-Up 8:30 – 8:50
*D5- Reading Comprehension 10:35-11:05 *D5 – Spelling and Word Work 11:05 – 11:30
KEY
Thursday Morning Work 8:30 – 9:00 National Geographic *D5 – Listen to Reading ipod centers 9:05 – 9:35 *D5 – Shared Reading 9:40 – 10:10 *D5 – Reading Comprehension 10:15 – 10:45
ART 10:50 –11:30
Friday Grammar Warm-Up 8:30 – 8:50 Writer’s Workshop 8:30 – 9:10 *D5 Spelling (Test) 9:15 – 9:45 *D5 – Book Clubs 9:50 – 10:20 *D5 – Reading Comprehension 10:25 – 10:55 *D5 – Read to Self 11:00 – 11:30
*D5 - represents Daily 5 Reading Workshop
Lunch & Recess 11:40-12:20 Bathroom Break 12:20 – 12:30 Math 12:35-1:35
Math 12:35-1:35
Math 12:35-1:35
Math 12:35 – 1:35
Math 12:35 – 1:35
*D5 – Read to Self 1:40 – 2:00 *D5 – Spelling and Word Work 2:05 – 2:20
Science 1:40 – 2:40
Science Lab 1:40 – 2: 10 Social Studies 2:15-2:45
Social Studies 1:40 – 2:40
Social Studies 1:40 – 2:10 Writing Author Share 2:15 – 2:45
Science 2:25 – 3:25
Library 2:45 – 3:20
PE 2:50 – 3:20
Writer’s Workshop 2:45 – 3: 30
PE 2:50 – 3:20
Directions: Calculate how much time is spent on each subject for the week. Record your answers below: Math: 315 weekly minutes Science: 150 weekly minutes Social Studies: 150 weekly minutes Reading/Phonics/Spelling: 480 weekly minutes Represents MOST balanced Writing w/Instruction & Grammar: 320 weekly minutes instructional times per ASCD.
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success Principals Self Assessment Checklist Take a few minutes to fill out the Self Assessment Checklist below. Reflect on your answers. This will determine the procedures that need to be put in place or reinforced. By being pro-active and making careful preparations, you begin to create a
Common Core readiness Our school is 100% Common Core compliant with the writing standards. Our teachers have copies of their writing Common Core standards.
Instruction Our students are writing enough in school (K-1 at least 3 days a week, 2-5 at least 4 days and each writing time is at least 45 minutes or more). We use common language for writing across all grades. Our curriculum spirals in and throughout the grades. Our teachers model their own writing in front of students. High, medium and low anonymous student writing samples are shown and discussed with students. Teachers require students to revise (make sound better)
Needs to be implemented
year and as the year progresses
Some reinforcement needed
Statements to consider at the beginning of the school
Accomplished
well-managed, successful atmosphere for writing.
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success and edit (make look better). Core Standards W.2.5, W.3.5, W.4.5, W.5.5
Conferencing is happening while students write. Differentiated instruction occurs during conferencing. Students have opportunities to write on topics of their own choice. Teachers maintain high expectations. Teachers present writing instruction before students begin their writing assignment. Students are given the opportunity to write for real-life purposes and audiences.
Classroom Management Students keep their writing in some type of Writer’s Notebook. Student writing is published by the teacher or the student, periodically. Core Standards W.K.6, W.1.6, W.2.6, W.3.6, W.4.6, W.5.6
Some published writing is displayed.
Writing Across the Curriculum Teachers point out examples of writing craft when reading and studying texts across all core subjects. Writing is done in all subject areas. At times students write using facts from texts to back up their opinions or central ideas. Core Standards W.4.9, W.5.9
Responsibilities of Administration I create an environment that supports teachers and the teaching of writing.
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success I do walk throughs during writing instruction. I check the frequency of student writing in their notebooks. I provide time at staff meetings for discussion about the teaching writing. I ask students about their writing. The district has demonstrated a dedication to professional development for all teachers in the area of writing. I have demonstrated a dedication to high-quality professional development for all teachers in the area of writing.
Teacher Training Our teachers have opportunities to discuss the strengths and weaknesses in actual student writing samples. Our teachers have opportunities to score writing at grade level meetings. Teachers are given time to share with colleagues ideas about writing instruction.
Home/School Connection Our students are writing out of school. Our parents know how we are teaching writing in our classrooms. Our parents have had the opportunity to see a rubric and understand how we use it for grading. Our parents know our policy about sending student writing home.
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
Problems Teachers Face with Teaching Writing Directions: What challenges do you face during writing time? What do you feel you’re good at during writing time? Put a + in the box if the question is a GLOW, a positive for you. Put a – if the question is a GROW, an area of challenge for you.
Name:____________________________________Grade:_____________
Classroom Management Issues:
How often, and for how long, should my writing time be? When should I do writing? Morning or afternoon? What if the noise level is too loud during writing time? What if students finish at different times? How do I stop students from lining up at my desk to read their writing? What about students who don’t use their time wisely? What if I have so many different ability levels in my room? Do I have all of the students doing the same thing at the same time (i.e.- Monday-pre-write/plan, Tuesday-draft/write, etc…)
If the students are all doing different things during writing time, how do I keep track of who is doing what? What do I say to students when they say they are all done? What do students do when they are done writing?
Material Management Issues:
Where should I house their writing (i.e.-journal, spiral bound, binder, notebook, or folder)? What kind of paper should they use (i.e.-blank, notebook, handwriting, etc…)?
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
Should they use dictionaries when they write? What is a “sound card”, and how does it help students? What do students do with their finished piece? Where do they put it?
Do I provide a prompt every time they write? How much time should be spent writing to a prompt verses free choice writing? Do I help them brainstorm ideas to write about? What if students write on the same topic over and over again? Is it okay if students write about a video game, T.V. show and/or movie?
Writing Content & Ideas:
Motivation/Interest Level:
Some students groan when it is writing time; what do I do? What do I do with a student who doesn’t want to write? How do I handle a student who doesn’t know what to write about? Some students aren’t working up to potential; what do I do with them? What do I say to a student who is writing boring pieces?
Teaching of Writing:
How do I teach writing? How do I know what to teach in a writing lesson?
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
How many days, and for how long do I spend teaching writing? How do I assess if they got the writing lesson I taught?
Writing Process:
Do I need to teach the writing process? Do I have all of my students doing the same thing at the same time (i.e.- Monday- planning, Tuesday-writing, Wednesday-editing, Thursday-revising, Friday-publishing)?
Should my students plan their writing first before they write? How should they plan their writing? Do I let them choose what planning organizer to use, or do I tell them? How long should I give students to plan their writing? Do I check it before they began writing? What if their writing doesn’t match their plan? How do I teach them to use their plan when writing? What if I have a student who doesn’t want to plan their writing, and just wants to get started writing?
Writing Process-Planning:
Writing Process-Writing:
What do you do with students who don’t know how to start their writing? What if I am not happy with the topic they are writing about? How do I handle a student who finishes too quickly?
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
What does a student do if they aren’t finished and writing time is over? When a student uses inappropriate language in their writing, what do I do? Do I spell words for students when they ask how to spell something? What if a student doesn’t know where to write? What if a student forgets what they wrote?
What is editing? How much editing should I expect from my students? Do my students have to edit every piece they write? What if they read over their writing and say it is perfect? How do I teach my students to edit their own writing? What if students are spelling high frequency words wrong in their writing? What if they spell words right on spelling test, but wrong in their writing? How do I know if my students edited their own work?
Writing Process-Editing:
Writing Process-Revising:
What is revising? How much revising should I expect from my students? Should students revise every piece they write? How do I teach my students how to revise?
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
What do students do when they have editing and revised their own work? How do I know if my students revised their own work?
What is the difference between conferencing and correcting? When do I conference and when do I correct? When do I conference with a student? How do I know who to conference with? How many students do I conference with in a day? How do I keep track of who I have conferenced with? How many pieces do I conference with a student on? Do I pick the piece that they are to conference with me on? How do I know what to teach in a conference? Do I conference with a student if they haven’t editing or revised their piece on their own? Do I edit their spelling; do I write the correct spelling on top of their words? Do I write their revised answers on their writing?
Writing Process-Conferencing:
Writing Process-Publishing:
What is publishing? Who publishes the piece of writing? Does all of their work get published?
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
Who chooses which piece gets published? How does a piece get published? After a piece is published, what happens to it?
Writing Process-Sharing:
What is sharing, and why do it? When does sharing take place? How long does it take? Who should share? What does a student share? What does the rest of the class do?
Assessment:
What is the purpose of assessing students’ writing? How can I assess their writing? When do I assess their writing? How many pieces do I assess? What do I do with the assessment information?
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
Writing Program Evaluation Questions Determining Needs Questions to Consider 1 Is your school currently using a writing program? 2 Is the writing program a purchased school-wide
curriculum? 3 Is the writing program a district-teacher designed curriculum? 4 Is the writing program aligned with the CCSS? 5 Are teachers and/or other staff members
effectively trained to use the designated writing curriculum? 6 Are expected outcomes being achieved? 7 What’s working with the program or materials
currently being used? 8 What’s not working with the program or materials currently being used?
Yes
No
Other
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success Sample Items for Grade 3: Excerpt from Eliza’s Cherry Trees: Japan’s Gift to America by Andrea Zimmerman Sample Item 3: Questions and Standards
Sample Item 3: Advances and Answers
Question:
Standard RI.3.9: Provides a comparison and contrast of the most important points and/or key details presented in two texts on the same topic.
You have read two texts about famous people in American history who solved a problem by working to make a change.
Write an article for your school newspaper describing how Eliza and Carver faced challenges to change something in America.
Standard RI.3.3: Describe the relationship between a series of historical events, scientific concepts or ideas, or steps in technical procedures in text, using language that pertains to time, sequence, and cause/effect. Standard W.3.2: Write informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas and information clearly. Standard W.3.7: Conduct short research projects that build knowledge about a topic.
In your article, be sure to describe in detail why some Standard L3.1: Demonstrate command of the conventions solutions they tried worked and others did not work. Tell how the challenges each one faced were the same of standard English grammar and usage when writing or and how they were different. speaking.
Standard L3.2: Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing.
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success Sample Items for Grade 7: “Amelia Earhart: Life and Disappearance” Sample Item 11: Questions and Standards
Sample Item 11: Advances and Answers
Question:
Standard RI.7.1: Cite several pieces of textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text. Standard RI.7.8: Trace and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is sound and the evidence is relevant and sufficient to support the claims Standard RI.7.9: Analyze how two or more authors writing about the same topic shape their presentations of key information by emphasizing different evidence or advancing different interpretations of facts. Standard W.7.2: Write informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas, concepts, and information through the selection, organization, and analysis of relevant content (includes W.7.2.a-f). Standard W.7.9: Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research (includes W.7.9.a and b). Standard L.7.1: Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking (includes L.7.1.a-c). Standard L.7.2: Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing (includes L.7.2.a and b).
You have read two texts and watched a video describing Amelia Earhart. All three include information that supports the claim that Earhart was a daring, courageous person. The three texts are: “The Biography of Amelia Earhart” “Earhart’s Final Resting Place Believed Found” “Amelia Earhart’s Life and Disappearance” (video) Consider the argument each author uses to demonstrate Earhart’s bravery.
Write an essay that analyzes the strength of the arguments related to Earhart’s bravery in a least two of the texts. Remember to use textual evidence to support your ideas.
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
Writing Program Evaluation Name of Program: ________________________ 3-Point Scale
= criteria fully met
Date Implemented: _______________
= criteria partially met
= criteria not met
Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features Evaluation Category 1.
Grade 2
CC Standard 1. Text Type: Opinion
2.
CC Standard 2. Text Type: Informative
3.
CC Standard 3. Text Type: Narrative
4.
Student Samples for EACH Text Type
5.
Rubrics for EACH Text Type
6.
CC. Standard 4. Appropriate Development, Organization, Style
7.
NA Starts in Grade 3
CC Standard 5. Planning & Revision/Editing Process
8.
CC Standard 6. Use of Technology
9.
CC Standard 7. Research Projects
10.
CC Standard 8. Gathering, Assessing, and Integrating Information
11.
CC Standard 9. Drawing Evidence from Texts
12.
NA Starts in Grade 4
CC. Standard 10.
NA
Range of Writing
Starts in Grade 3
Grade 5
Explanation
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction 13.
Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Instruction
14.
Writing Strategies
15.
Writer’s Workshop Model
16.
Process Writing Approach
17.
6 Traits/ 6 + 1 Traits Model
18.
Concise Daily Lesson Plans
19.
Web-Based Resources
20.
Multimedia Resources for Interactive Whiteboards
21.
Formative Assessment
Professional Development 22.
Program Implementation Training
23.
Professional Development is Ongoing
24.
Coaching
25.
Classroom Demonstration Videos
Note: For help in determining whether your program or materials fully, partially, or do not meet evaluation categories, use the IESD’s White Paper Appendix B (Evaluation Criteria). Appendix B lists specific attributes and examples for Grades 2 and 5.
Table of Contents – Second Grade-Unit 4 Day and Main Objectives Day 1 Opinion Writing +Write opinion pieces Day 2 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces Day 3 Opinion Writing +Use reflexive pronouns -Write opinion pieces Day 4 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Strengthen writing by revising and editing Day 5 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Strengthen writing by revising and editing Day 6 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Strengthen writing by revising and editing -Use a variety of digital tools to produce and publish Day 7 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Use reflexive pronouns
NFS+
New Focus Skills from the CCSS
RFS-
Review Focus Skills from the CCSS
Visual Aids
What is Opinion Writing?
W.2.1 W.2.1
L.2.1c W.2.1 W.2.1 W.2.5
W.2.1 W.2.5
W.2.1 W.2.5 W.2.6
W.2.1 L.2.1c
Linking Words Linking Words (answer key) 2 Paragraph Planning Sheet Reflexive Pronouns Reflexive Pronouns (answer key) Opinion Revising/Editing Checklist Student Planning Sample – “My Friends So Important”
Day 8 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Use reflexive pronouns -Use an apostrophe to form contractions and possessives Day 9 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Strengthen writing by revising and editing -Use reflexive pronouns -Use an apostrophe to form contractions and possessives Day 10 Opinion Writing +Use commas in greetings and closings of letters -Write opinion pieces Day 11 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Use reflexive pronouns -Use commas in greetings and closings of letters -Use an apostrophe to form contractions and possessives Day 12 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Use reflexive pronouns -Use commas in greetings and closings of letters -Use an apostrophe to form contractions and possessives Day 13 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Strengthen writing by revising and editing -Use reflexive pronouns -Use commas in greetings and closings of letters -Use an apostrophe to form contractions and possessives
W.2.1 L.2.1c L.2.2c
Contractions Contractions (answer key)
W.2.1 W.2.5 L.2.1c L.2.2c
Student Writing Sample: “Friendship”
Parts of a Letter
L.2.2b W.2.1
W.2.1 L.2.1c L.2.2b L.2.2c
W.2.1 L.2.1c L.2.2b L.2.2c
W.2.1 W.2.5 L.2.1c L.2.2b L.2.2c
Letters to the Editor New Policy Article
Day 14 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Strengthen writing by revising and editing -Use a variety of digital tools to produce and publish -Use reflexive pronouns -Use commas in greetings and closings of letters -Use an apostrophe to form contractions and possessives Day 15 Opinion Writing -Write opinion pieces -Use reflexive pronouns -Use commas in greetings and closings of letters -Use an apostrophe to form contractions and possessives
W.2.1 W.2.5 W.2.6 L.2.1c L.2.2b L.2.2c
W.2.1 L.2.1c L.2.2b L.2.2c
Advanced Preparation: Write a two-paragraph opinion piece in the form of a letter to the editor to use for modeling scoring on the Rubric. Rubric
GRADE 2 UNIT 4: DAY 1 OF 15
OPINION WRITING
Core Standard W.2.1: Write opinion pieces in which they introduce the topic or book they are writing about, state an opinion, supply reasons that support the opinion, use linking words to connect opinion and reasons, and provide a concluding statement or section.
• •
One copy to display and student copies of “What is Opinion Writing?” “The Elements of Opinion Writing” to display
• • • • • •
Anticipatory Set (Day 1: 5 minutes) Input (Day 1: 10 minutes) Modeling (Day 1: 10 minutes) Checking for Understanding (Day 1: 5 minutes) Independent Practice (Day 1: 15 minutes) Closure (Day 1: 5 minutes)
GRADE 2 UNIT 4: DAY 1 OF 15
Anticipatory Set (Day 1: 5 minutes) Ask students to turn to a neighbor to name a favorite color. Then tell students your favorite color. Have students share the colors they named. Then ask if everyone had the same favorite color––or if many different colors were named. Ask students if there is a right or wrong answer to the favorite-color question. Ask students how favorite colors are like opinions––the ideas and thoughts we have about things. Guide them in understanding that there are many different favorite colors––and there are many different opinions. Remind students that facts can be proven to be true or false, but an opinion cannot be proven true or false. Explain that it is fine for people to have different opinions. Remind students that they wrote about facts in Unit 4. Explain that the class will write opinions in this unit. Note: Much of the content of this lesson relates to Unit 4, Day 1. Review of Fact and Opinion is essential to understanding this unit.
Input (Day 1: 10 minutes) 1. Display “What is Opinion Writing?” and share the purpose of Opinion Writing. 2. Read the Elements of Opinion Writing to point out that opinion writing follows a similar format as the “2-Paragraph Plan & Write”: Topic Sentence stating opinion, reasons to support topic, and conclusion. 3. Ask students to name workers who use opinion writing, workers such as some newspaper writers, writers of TV commercials, writers of ads in magazines and other printed sources, and lawyers who are working with cases.
Modeling (Day 1: 10 minutes) 1. Identify a topic that readily gives rise to opinion writing, a topic such as cleaning up a city park. 2. Write two facts about the topic, for example: There are bottles and cans in the park. The playground equipment in the park is broken. Say: “These are facts. We can prove whether these statements are true or false.” 3. Write two opinions about the topic, for example: I think people in the neighborhood should clean up the park. I believe a clean park would help the neighborhood become a better place for everyone.” Pause. Then say: “These are opinions. They tell what someone thinks and feels. They cannot be proven true or false.”
GRADE 2 UNIT 4: DAY 1 OF 15
Checking for Understanding (Day 1: 15 minutes) Tell students to stand up if you read a fact––and sit down if you read an opinion. Read the sentences below. Feel free to add additional sentences if you feel they would be beneficial to the class. Have students begin the activity in a crouched position. 1. Trees are a kind of plant. (Fact) 2. You are in the second grade. (Fact) 3. Trees are good to have in your yard. (Opinion) 4. My car has tires. (Fact) 5. The tires on my car are the best kind. (Opinion) 6. Pigs have a really stinky smell. (Opinion) 7. Some pigs live on farms. (Fact) 8. Second grade is the best grade! (Opinion) After you complete the activity, write each of the sentence pairs––fact/opinion––on the board or another display surface. Then discuss each pair, guiding students in pointing out why the facts are facts and the opinions are opinions. For example, say: “My car has tires. This can be proven to be true or false––because we can look at my car to see if it has tires. You also heard me say: ‘The tires on my car are the best tires.’ This is an opinion. It tells how I feel. It tells what I think. It cannot be proven true or false.” As time allows, continue with the other sentence pairs.
Independent Practice (Day 1: 5 minutes) Today is Focus Skill Writing, using RFS, fact and opinion. Have students choose any topic of interest, and write two facts and two opinions about topic. If necessary, provide prompts such as the following: new choices on the lunch menu, equipment used in the gym, a new after-school activity.
Closure (Day 1: 5 minutes) “Author’s Chair” Invite volunteers to share one fact and one opinion.
GRADE 2 UNIT 4: DAY 1 OF 15
OPINION WRITING: What is Opinion Writing?
What is Opinion Writing? Genre: Opinion Purpose: To Persuade
Purpose of Opinion Writing: Tell the writer’s opinion, or what the writer thinks, about a specific topic.
Elements of Opinion Writing: Opinion stated in topic sentence Reasons supported by concrete details Linking words used to link ideas Concluding statement that represents the opinion Which Professionals Use Opinion Writing? Write Opinions
Lawyer Teacher Advertiser Newspaper/magazine columnist
Read Opinions
Judge Principal/School Board Consumer Reader
Citizens write opinions to request changes from leaders.
GRADE 2 UNIT 4: DAY 15 OF 15
OPINION WRITING: 6 Traits Rubric
Name:_____________________________ Date: ______________ Writing Subject:________________________ Directions: Circle the score for each category. Add the scores to determine the overall score.
Trait Ideas & Content • • • •
W.2.1
Score
Teacher Comments
6 5 4 3 2 1
W.2.5
The ideas are clear, focused and original An opinion about a topic is present There are reasons supporting the opinion The writing has been revised
Organization
W.2.1
6 5 4 3 2 1
W.2.5
• The writing is organized into paragraphs each with a main idea and details • The writing has all of the parts of a letter • A concluding statement is present • Linking words are used to connect the opinion and reasons
Voice
6 5 4 3 2 1
• The writing isn’t boring • The writing shows feelings and emotions • The reader responds to the writing with a smile, laugh, gasp, frown, etc.
Word Choice
6 5 4 3 2 1
• The words used are descriptive and create a clear mental picture • The writing has feelings and emotions
Sentence Fluency
6 5 4 3 2 1
• The writing flows and sounds natural • Sentence length and structure vary
Conventions
L.2.1c
6 5 4 3 2 1
L.2.2b, c
• The writing follows standard capitalization, punctuation, spelling, grammar and usage rules • Reflexive pronouns are used correctly • Commas are used in the greeting and closing of a letter • Apostrophes are used to form contractions and possessives
Presentation
6 5 4 3 2 1
W.2.5
• The writing is neat and legible • The piece has been edited. 6 – Outstanding
5 – Very Good
4 – Good
3 – Average
2 – Below Average
1 – Poor
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success
Practice Page Writing Program Evaluation Name of Program: _____________________________ 3-Point Scale
= criteria fully met
Date Implemented: _______________
= criteria partially met
= criteria not met
Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features Evaluation Category
1.
5.
Grade 2
Explanation
CC Standard 1. Text Type: Opinion
Rubrics for Text Type
Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction 17.
6 Traits/6 + 1 Traits Model
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success Name: ___________________
Date: ___________________
3-2-1 Summarization Activity
3 things that you learned
2
things that really stuck out
1 lingering question
A Formula for Common Core Assessment Success 7 Keys to Common Core Writing Success Key One – Reflect on Current Writing Practices
Key Two – Define CCSS Writing Goals
Key Three – Time on Task
Key Four – Choose Your Writing Tools
Key Five – Revising & Editing
Key Six –Conferencing
Key Seven – Assessment {Formative & Summative}
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core
November 2013
Interactive Educational Systems Design, Inc. Ellen R. Bialo and Jay Sivin-Kachala 33 West 87th Street, Suite 2A New York, NY 10024 212-769-1715
[email protected]
Table of Contents Introduction ............................................................................................................................................... 1 Methodology ........................................................................................................................................... 1 About This White Paper.......................................................................................................................... 1 Evaluation Categories ............................................................................................................................... 2 Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features ................................................... 2 Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction ........................................................................... 3 Professional Development ...................................................................................................................... 5 Top-Level Ratings of Six Writing Programs .......................................................................................... 7 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................................ 9 Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features ................................................... 9 Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction ........................................................................... 9 Professional Development ...................................................................................................................... 9 References ................................................................................................................................................ 10 Appendix A. Findings in Detail.............................................................................................................. 12 Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features ................................................. 13 Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction ......................................................................... 19 Professional Development .................................................................................................................... 23 Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria ........................................................................................................... 25 Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features ................................................. 25 Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction ......................................................................... 31 Professional Development .................................................................................................................... 33
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
i
Introduction Writing represents a critical part of the elementary curriculum—now more than ever. A substantial body of research and expert literature published during the last 10 years provides a solid foundation for describing principles of effective writing instruction. Additionally, the Common Core State Standards have raised the bar substantially with respect to writing instruction—describing types of writing students at various grades should be able to carry out. How do leading writing programs measure up to these expectations? This white paper examines six elementary writing programs to see how they match up to requirements of the Common Core State Standards in writing and to research-based best practices and common writing program expectations from teachers and administrators. Programs that were reviewed include the following:
CraftPlus (Maupin House)
Essential Guide to Writing (Empowering Writers)
Strategies for Writers (Zaner-Bloser)
Traits Writing (Scholastic)
Units of Study in Opinion, Information, and Narrative Writing (Firsthand/Heinemann)
WriteSteps (WriteSteps)
Methodology IESD conducted an analysis of the Common Core State Standards in writing and a review of recent high-quality research related to effective writing instruction. Based on this analysis and review, IESD developed a set of 17 evaluation categories. Top-level descriptions of the categories and research support related to them are provided in the Evaluation Categories section of this report. For each evaluation category, criteria were developed for full and partial credit at grades 2 and 5. Using these criteria, IESD evaluators examined sets of program materials and awarded ratings in each category at grades 2 and 5. For categories related to professional development, evaluators also consulted descriptions of PD services available from program websites. A combined rating was then developed for each category across grade levels.
About This White Paper The remainder of this white paper includes the following substantive sections:
Evaluation Categories describes the categories used in the writing program evaluation, including supporting research
Top-Level Ratings of Six Writing Programs presents top-level results of IESD’s evaluation, in table form
Conclusions presents cross-comparison generalizations regarding the results of the evaluations
Appendix A. Findings in Detail presents results of IESD’s analysis by grade level, with explanations where programs do not fully meet the criteria
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria presents the criteria that were used to guide the program evaluations in each category
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
1
Evaluation Categories This section presents the categories used in the writing program evaluation, including supporting research. It is divided into three parts:
Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features, including student writing samples and rubrics in support of the text types specified by the Common Core Writing Standards
Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction
Professional Development
Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features Common Core State Standards—Writing
The Common Core State Standards include 10 College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Writing that describe the writing “skills and understandings” students ought to be able to demonstrate in order to prepare for college and workforce training. Expectations are broken into broad categories related to text types and purposes, production and distribution of writing, research to build and present knowledge, and range of writing, as shown below. Text Types and Purposes 1. Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts, using valid reasoning and relevant and sufficient evidence. 2. Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content. 3. Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well-chosen details, and well-structured event sequences. Production and Distribution of Writing 4. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. 5. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach. 6. Use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing and to interact and collaborate with others. Research to Build and Present Knowledge 7. Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects based on focused questions, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation. 8. Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source, and integrate the information while avoiding plagiarism. 9. Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. Range of Writing 10. Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection, and revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of tasks, purposes, and audiences. (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010, p. 18)
Grade-specific standards in each of these areas spell out expectations for what students ought to be able to accomplishment by the end of each grade. For more detail about the grade-specific standards, see Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria. Student Writing Samples to Support Text Types
According to a summary of writing instruction research by Troia and Olinghouse (2013), a strong evidence base supports having students “read and analyze examples of one or more texts in order to recognize and emulate the patterns or forms in these examples in their own writing” (p. 349; see also IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
2
Evaluation Categories
Graham & Perin, 2007a, 2007b). More specifically, a study of third and fourth graders found a positive effect from having students use a model paper to “scaffold the process of generating a list of criteria for an effective story or essay” and then use a rubric to assess their own work (Andrade et al., 2008)1. This finding supports the recommendation to have students “critiqu[e] sample pieces of writing” as part of learning to apply a rubric (p. 4). Rubrics to Support Text Types
Another practice identified by Troia and Olinghouse (2013) as having strong supporting evidence is use of rubrics, described by Andrade et al. (2008) as “a document that articulates the expectations for an assignment by listing the criteria, or what counts, and describing levels of quality from excellent to poor” (p. 3). While rubrics are sometimes thought of primarily as assessment tools, they also help teach key characteristics of specific types of writing, provide a common framework for revision suggestions and feedback, and guide students in self-assessment (Andrade et al., 2008; Graham & Perin, 2007b; Troia & Olinghouse, 2013).
Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Instruction
Common Core Language Anchor Standards call for students to “Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking” and “Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing” (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers, 2010, p. 25). Research on traditional grammar instruction raises doubts about its ability to improve student writing (e.g., Graham & Perin, 2007a, 2007b; Weaver, 1996). Instead, leading experts recommend that students should be taught about grammar, usage, and mechanics in a writing-related context (Smith, Cheville, & Hillocks, 2006; Weaver, 1996). For example, Weaver suggests extensive use of examples, a focus on production of effective sentences, and discussing usage in context (pp. 26-27). Writing Strategies
A meta-analysis of 20 studies of elementary writing instruction found a strong positive effect from strategy instruction, in which “the teacher modeled how to use specific strategies for planning, revising, and/or editing text; students practiced applying the target strategies in at least three sessions, with the goal of using these strategies independently” (Graham, McKeown, Kiuhara, & Harris, 2012, p. 881)2. The authors explained: Most of the studies . . . involved teaching genre-specific strategies (e.g., how to plan and write a persuasive text), whereas the rest focused on teaching strategies that could be applied across genres (e.g., semantic webbing). . . . All of the studies produced a positive effect. (p. 886) Writer's Workshop Model
A popular and influential approach to writing instruction has been the writer’s workshop, as developed over multiple decades by Lucy Calkins and colleagues at the Teachers College Reading and Writing Workshop. Key elements of the writer’s workshop include opportunities for students to write daily or almost daily; student selection of topics; explicit teaching of skills and strategies through mini-lessons, often including teacher demonstrations/modeling; a writing process approach; consulting with individual 1 2
The comparison group generated a list of criteria for effective stories/essays, but did not analyze a model or use a rubric. Effect size of 1.02, considered a large effect in education research (p. 885).
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
3
Evaluation Categories
students or small groups about their writing in a workshop/conference format; and writing for an audience, including sharing of writing with other students (Calkins, 1994, 2006; Smithson, 2008). Process Writing Approach
Substantial evidence supports a process approach to writing, which researchers have defined as including extended opportunities for writing; writing for real audiences extending beyond the teacher; personalized individual assistance and instruction; engaging in cycles of planning, writing, and reviewing; and self-reflection and/or self-evaluation (Graham, McKeown, Kiuhara, & Harris, 2012, p. 881; see also Graham, Bollinger, et al., 2012; Graham & Hebert, 2010; Graham & Perin, 2007b; Troia & Olinghouse, 2013, p. 349)3. 6 Traits/6+1 Traits Model
This influential and widely used model “empowers students and teachers to communicate about qualities of writing—ideas, organization, voice, word choice, sentence fluency, [and] conventions” (Culham, 2006, p. 53)4. Pioneered by the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory (now Education Northwest), the model provides a framework for instruction, assessment, and revision. A large-scale study of grade 5 students found that use of the model “significantly increased student writing scores during the year in which it was introduced to schools” (Coe et al., 2011, p. xiii)5. Concise Daily Lesson Plans
Concise daily lesson plans represent an important resource for teachers in planning effective instruction. According to Stronge (2007), “Organizing time and preparing materials in advance of instruction have been noted as important aspects of effective teaching…. Both the organization of time and the preparation of materials are components of the broader practice of planning carefully for instruction” (Chapter 4; “Planning and Preparing for Instruction,” para. 1). Similarly, Cunningham (2009) writes, “Few factors are as vital to teaching success as having well-designed lessons” (Chapter 7; “Lesson Plans: Success by Design,” para. 3). Effective lesson plans integrate learning objectives, learning activities, and “strategies to check student understanding” (Milkova, 2012, para. 1; see also Stronge, 2007). Experience suggests that lesson plans should be concise in order to make them easy for teachers to apply. Web-Based Resources
Access to program resources via the Web promotes ease of use, facilitates easy access, and allows updating of program resources over time. Multimedia Resources for Interactive Whiteboards
Research has shown that use of multimedia resources with interactive whiteboards (IWBs) can have a positive impact on student engagement, with the potential to improve student learning (Glover et al., 2005; Higgins et al., 2007; Marzano & Haystead, 2009; Miller & Glover, 2010; Smith et al., 2005). This is more likely to happen if resources focus on key content (Marzano, 2009, pp. 80-81) and are used to
3
Based on 16 studies; moderate effect size of 0.40 (Graham, McKeown, Kiuhara, & Harris, 2012, p. 885). In addition to the six primary traits of ideas, organization, voice, word choice, sentence fluency, and conventions, “presentation” was later added as a seventh “important but optional” trait (Coe et al., 2011, p. 5). This version is typically referred to as the “6+1” model. 5 “After controlling for baseline writing scores, the estimated average score of students in the treatment group was 0.109 standard deviations higher (p = .023) than the estimated average score of students in the control group” (p. xiii). The study included data from “102 teachers and 2,230 students in the treatment condition and 94 teachers and 1,931 students in the control condition” (p. xii). 4
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
4
Evaluation Categories
stimulate student-teacher and student-student interaction, as opposed to passive presentation of information (Lewin et al., 2008; Miller & Glover, 2010; Smith et al., 2005). Formative Assessment
Based on a meta-analysis of research on formative writing assessment, Graham, Harris, and Hebert (2011) recommended that teachers should “use formative writing assessment to enhance students’ writing,” including feedback from teachers and peers, teaching students to assess their own writing, and monitoring students’ writing progress over time (p. 6)6.
Professional Development Program Implementation Training
In order to effectively implement a new instructional program, teachers must be trained on its features and implementation. According to a summary of key research-based features of effective professional development, there is a need for both “some initial learning in training sessions as well as considerable longer-term work in which teachers incorporate the new methodologies into their actual classroom practice” (Odden, 2011, p. 27). Professional Development Is Ongoing
Effective professional development is not a one-time event, but continues over time in order to support teachers in learning and applying new practices. A summary of current research on effective professional development explained: [E]ffective professional development for teachers is ongoing, which involves a combination of contact hours, duration, and coherence. . . . Research shows that teacher learning and changes in teaching practice involve a recursive and continual process that takes place over time. . . . This is because teachers often need several months or even years to transition from personal concerns about a new innovation to planning, implementation, and management concerns aimed at addressing student needs. (Hunzicker, 2010, pp. 7-8) Coaching
With the movement away from one-shot workshops toward ongoing PD that helps teachers implement new practices, coaching has become an increasingly popular model for supporting teachers. According to Odden (2011): Active learning implies some degree of coaching during regular school hours to help collaborative groups use student data to hone instructional strategies, to help teachers incorporate new instructional strategies into their classroom instructional practices, and to help teachers debrief on the effectiveness of the unit after it is taught. (p. 27) Coaches “support staff in implementing new learning with expert modeling, observation, feedback, and coaching until the new practice is mastered” (Vermont Department of Education, 2011, p. 10). While coaching is often conducted by local personnel, it can also be provided by outside consultants (Odden, 2011, p. 29).
6
The recommendation to provide feedback was based on 16 comparisons ranging from grades 2-9, with a large average weighted effect size of 0.77 (pp. 17-18). The recommendation to teach student self-assessment was based on 7 comparisons ranging from grades 3-12, with a moderate average weighted effect size of 0.46 (pp. 18-19). The recommendation to monitor student progress was based on 7 comparisons of mostly weaker writers and students with special needs in elementary and middle school grades, with a small average weighted effect size of 0.24 (p. 19). IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
5
Evaluation Categories
Classroom Demonstration Videos
An increasingly popular way of providing professional development support for teachers is through videos that present actual classroom instruction for teachers to analyze and use as models. Such video clips “can inspire and transform a teacher’s daily performance” (Pianta, 2011, p. 4), as well as lead to increased “understanding of the teaching-learning process, knowledge of subject-matter specific instructional strategies, and understanding of student thinking” (Santagata, 2009, pp. 38-39).
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
6
Top-Level Ratings of Six Writing Programs The table on the following page presents results of an evaluation of six writing programs. The evaluation focused on the Common Core Writing Standards, related instructional features, and other aspects of writing programs of importance to teachers of writing and district and school leaders. The evaluation was based on a detailed review of Grades 2 and 5 of each program, informed by the research and expert literature cited above. All summary scores below are based on a three-point scale representing judgments across both grade levels, where: = criteria fully met = criteria partially met = criteria not met For a more detailed breakdown of the ratings, including evaluations at grades 2 and 5 and ratings for each of the Common Core Writing Standards, see Appendix A. Findings in Detail.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
7
Top-Level Ratings of Six Writing Programs
Evaluation Category
CraftPlus (Maupin House)
Essential Guide to Writing (Empowering Writers)
Strategies for Writers (Zaner-Bloser)
Traits Writing (Scholastic)
Units of Study in Opinion, Information, and Narrative Writing (Firsthand/Heinemann)
WriteSteps (WriteSteps)
Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features
Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction Grammar, Usage, and
Addresses All Common Core Writing Standards Addresses the 3 Common Core Text Types Student Samples for Text Types Rubrics for Text Types
Mechanics Instruction Writing Strategies Writer's Workshop Model Process Writing Approach 6 Traits/6+1 Traits Model Concise Daily Lesson Plans Web-Based Resources Multimedia Resources for Interactive Whiteboards Formative Assessment
Professional Development (PD) Program Implementation Training PD Is Ongoing Coaching Classroom Demonstration Videos = criteria fully met
= criteria partially met
= criteria not met
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
88
Conclusions Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features Looking across the programs, WriteSteps and Strategies for Writers were the only programs that fully addressed all of the evaluation criteria in this area. WriteSteps and Strategies for Writers were the only programs that fully addressed all 10 Common Core Writing Standards. Strategies for Writers, Units of Study, and WriteSteps fully addressed all 3 Common Core text types (argument writing, informative/explanatory writing, narratives). These three programs also provided rubrics to guide teachers and students for the Common Core text types. Strategies for Writers and WriteSteps provided student writing samples to help students learn the Common Core text types. Only Strategies for Writers, Traits Writing, and WriteSteps fully addressed Common Core requirements for technology use in student writing (Writing Standard 6). Only Essential Guide to Writing, Strategies for Writers, and WriteSteps fully addressed Common Core requirements for gathering, assessing, and integrating information in student writing (Writing Standard 8). Other Common Core Writing Standards were addressed by all or most of the programs.
Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction Only Strategies for Writers and WriteSteps fully met the criteria for all 9 of these evaluation categories. Traits Writing fully met the criteria for all but one category (Web-based resources), where it partly met the evaluation criteria. Strategies for Writers, Traits Writing, and WriteSteps were the only programs to fully employ a 6 traits/6+1 traits model. Only Strategies for Writers and WriteSteps made all key program resources available on the Web. All 6 programs taught writing strategies and used a writer’s workshop model. All but Essential Guide to Writing fully met the criteria for teaching grammar, usage, and mechanics, process writing approach, and formative assessment. All but Essential Guide for Writing and Units of Study provided concise daily lesson plans featuring objectives, activities, and assessments of student learning. All but CraftPlus and Units of Study provided substantial resources for instruction using interactive whiteboards.
Professional Development None of the programs fully addressed all of the evaluation criteria related to professional development. Overall, the two strongest programs in this area were Units of Study and WriteSteps. CraftPlus, Units of Study, and WriteSteps fully addressed the criteria for program implementation training and ongoing PD. Only Essential Guide to Writing and WriteSteps fully addressed the criteria for providing coaching services.
CraftPlus, Traits Writing, and Units of Study fully met the criteria for classroom demonstration videos. Essential Guide to Writing and WriteSteps partly met these criteria.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
9
References Andrade, H. L., Du, Y., & Wang, X. (2008). Putting rubrics to the test: The effect of a model, criteria generation, and rubric-referenced self-assessment on elementary school students’ writing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 27(2), 3-13. Calkins, L. M. (1994). The art of teaching writing (new ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Calkins, L. (2006). A guide to the writing workshop, grades 3-5. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Coe, M., Hanita, M., Nishioka, V., Smiley, R. (2011, December). An investigation of the impact of the 6+1 trait writing model on grade 5 student writing achievement. Final report. National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance. Retrieved Aug. 26, 2013 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED527445.pdf Culham, R. (2006, October). The trait lady speaks up. Educational Leadership, 53-57. Cunningham, G. (2009). The new teacher’s companion: Practical wisdom for succeeding in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Available Sept. 3, 2013 from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/109051/chapters/
[email protected] Glover, D., Miller, D., Averis, D., & Door, V. (2005). The interactive whiteboard: A literature survey. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 14(2), 155-170. Graham, S., Bollinger, A., Booth Olson, C., D’Aoust, C., MacArthur, C., McCutchen, D., & Olinghouse, N. (2012). Teaching elementary school students to be effective writers: A practice guide. (NCEE 2012-4058). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved Sept. 3, 2013 from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/writing_pg_062612.pdf. Graham, S., Harris, K., & Hebert, M. A. (2011). Informing writing: The benefits of formative assessment. A Carnegie Corporation Time to Act report. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Graham, S., & Hebert, M. A. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation Time to Act Report. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Graham, S., McKeown, D., Kiuhara, S., & Harris, K. R. (2012). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for students in the elementary grades. Journal of Educational Psychology, 104(4), 879-896. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007a). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99(3), 445-476. Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007b). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools: A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education. Higgins, S., Beauchamp, G., & Miller, D. (2007). Reviewing the literature on interactive whiteboards. Learning, Media and Technology, 32(3), 213-225. Hunzicker, J. (2010, June). Characteristics of effective professional development: A checklist. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED510366) Lewin, C., Somekh, B., & Steadman, S. (2008). Embedding interactive whiteboards in teaching and learning: The process of change in pedagogic practice. Education and Information Technologies, 13(4), 291-303. Marzano, R. J. (2009, November). Teaching with interactive whiteboards. Educational Leadership, 67(3), 80-82. Marzano, R. J., & Haystead, M. (2009, July). Final report on the evaluation of the Promethean technology. Englewood, CO: Marzano Research Laboratory. Retrieved May 25, 2010 from http://www.prometheanworld.com/upload/pdf/Final_Report_on_ActivClassroom_%282%29.pdf Milkova, S. (2012). Strategies for effective lesson planning. University of Michigan Center for Research on Learning and Teaching. Retrieved Sept. 3, 2013 from http://www.crlt.umich.edu/gsis/p2_5 IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
10
References
Miller, D., & Glover, D. (2010). Interactive whiteboards: A literature survey. In M. Thomas & E. C. Schmid (Eds.), Interactive whiteboards for education: Theory, research and practice (pp. 1-19). New York: Information Science Reference. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors. Odden, A. (2011). Resources: The dollars and sense of comprehensive professional learning. Journal of Staff Development, 32(4), 26-32. Pianta, R. C. (2011, November). Teaching children well: New evidence-based approaches to teacher professional development and training. Center for American Progress. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED535637). Retrieved Sept. 5, 2013 from http://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED535637.pdf Santagata, R. (2009). Designing video-based professional development for mathematics teachers in lowperforming schools. Journal of Teacher Education, 60(1), 38-51. Smith, H. J., Higgins, S., Wall, K., & Miller, J. (2005). Interactive whiteboards: Boon or bandwagon? A critical review of the literature. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 21, 91-101. Smith, M. W., Cheville, J., & Hillocks, G. Jr. (2006). “I guess I’d better watch my English”: Grammars and the teaching of the English language arts. In C. A MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research (pp. 263-274). New York: The Guilford Press. Smithson, M. S. (2008). Academic effects of writer’s workshop (Doctoral dissertation). Retrieved Aug. 31, 2013 from http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/110/ Stronge, J. H. (2007). Qualities of effective teachers (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Retrieved Oct. 24, 2013 from http://www.ascd.org/publications/books/105156/chapters/Planning-and-Organizing-forInstruction.aspx Troia, G. A., & Olinghouse, N. G. (2013). The Common Core State Standards and evidence-based educational practices: The case of writing. School Psychology Review, 42(3), 343-357. Vermont Department of Education. (2011, April). A guide for increasing the effectiveness of professional development in schools and districts. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED536798) Weaver, C. (1996). Teaching grammar in context. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
11
Appendix A. Findings in Detail The table below presents detailed results of an evaluation of six writing programs7. The evaluation focused on the Common Core Writing Standards, related instructional features, and other aspects of writing programs of importance to teachers of writing and district and school leaders. Each of the 10 Common Core Writing Standards was evaluated separately. The evaluation was based on a detailed review of Grades 2 and 5 of each program. In each evaluation category, programs were judged at each grade level on a three-point scale where = criteria fully met = criteria partially met = criteria not met In each evaluation category, programs were also awarding a “total” judgment using the same three-point scale, summarizing how well the program met the category evaluation criteria across both grade levels. In cases where the criteria were not fully met, a brief explanation is included. The table is formatted in a two-page spread design, in which evaluations of three programs (CraftPlus, Essential Guide to Writing, and Strategies for Writers) are presented on one page, and evaluations of the other three programs (Traits Writing, Units of Study, and WriteSteps) for the same evaluation categories are presented on the following page. For an explanation of the evaluation criteria for each category, see Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria.
7
This study was commissioned by WriteSteps. Program evaluations were carried out independently by IESD. IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
12
Appendix A. Findings in Detail
Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features CraftPlus (Maupin House)
Essential Guide to Writing (Empowering Writers) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Evaluation Category
Total
Gr. 2
Gr. 5
Explanation
Total
Common Core Writing Standard 1. Text Type: Arguments
Little to no guidance at grade 2 for introducing the topic, linking words, and conclusions.
Criteria fully met.
Common Core Standard 2. Text Type: Informative/ Explanatory Texts
At grade 2, no evidence of focus on transitions that link opinions/assertions to reasons. Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Common Core Writing Standard 3. Text Type: Narratives Student Samples for Text Types
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Rubrics for Text Types
Student samples lacking at grade 5. Grade 2 student sample of an argument was not used as a model of opinion writing. Opinion/persuasive writing did not have a dedicated rubric at grade 5.
Very limited guidance/practice with introductions and conclusions at grade 2. Transitions to link information not addressed at grade 5. Transitions to communicate sequence not addressed at grade 5. No samples of student writing found for informative/expository text at grade 2.
No rubrics found for opinion writing at either grade. No rubrics found for informative/ explanatory writing at grade 2. Grade 2 rubric for narrative not provided to students.
Criteria fully met.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Total
Strategies for Writers (Zaner-Bloser) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
13
Appendix A. Findings in Detail Traits Writing (Scholastic) Gr. 5 Explanation
Units of Study in Opinion, Information, and Narrative Writing (Firsthand/Heinemann) Total Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Evaluation Category
Total
Gr. 2
Common Core Writing Standard 1. Text Type: Arguments Common Core Standard 2. Text Type: Informative/ Explanatory Texts
Persuasive writing taught only as extensions/ variations at grade 2.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Common Core Writing Standard 3. Text Type: Narratives Student Samples for Text Types
Introduction of a topic not taught in grade 2. In grade 5, linking ideas and providing conclusions not taught in context of expository writing. Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Grade 2 student samples were mostly not shared with students for them to analyze.
Criteria fully met.
Rubrics for Text Types
At grade 2, no samples as models for opinion writing. Grade 5 samples for opinion writing mix text types & do not focus on key text type elements. Grade 5 expository samples do not model all text type criteria from CC standard. At grade 2, there is only one generic scoring guide for teachers and one for students, not specific to any text type.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Total
WriteSteps (WriteSteps) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
14
Appendix A. Findings in Detail CraftPlus (Maupin House) Explanation
Total
Strategies for Writers (Zaner-Bloser) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Evaluation Category
Total
Gr. 2
Gr. 5
Common Core Writing Standard 4. Appropriate Development, Organization, & Style Common Core Writing Standard 5. Planning and Revision Process
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Common Core Writing Standard 6. Use of Technology
Use of technology is optional, not part of the program’s planned experiences for students.
Criteria fully met.
Common Core Writing Standard 7. Research Projects
Criteria fully met.
Common Core Writing Standard 8. Gathering, Assessing, and Integrating Information
While limited research is a part of some lessons in grade 5, it does not meet the criterion of “addressing multiple aspects of a topic.” Limited gathering of evidence from sources in grade 5, with no requirement to provide a list of sources.
Writing as a process not addressed for informational/ expository writing or opinion writing. Use of digital tools to produce and publish writing not found for grade 2. Use of technology limited to typing at grade 5. Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Total
Essential Guide to Writing (Empowering Writers) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
15
Appendix A. Findings in Detail Traits Writing (Scholastic) Gr. 5 Explanation
Units of Study in Opinion, Information, and Narrative Writing (Firsthand/Heinemann) Total Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Evaluation Category
Total
Gr. 2
Common Core Writing Standard 4. Appropriate Development, Organization, & Style Common Core Writing Standard 5. Planning and Revision Process Common Core Writing Standard 6. Use of Technology
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Common Core Writing Standard 7. Research Projects Common Core Writing Standard 8. Gathering, Assessing, and Integrating Information
Criteria fully met.
At grade 2, use of technology is optional, not part of the program’s planned experiences for students. Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
At grade 2, there is writing based on observation, but not writing based on information collected from texts.
No evidence of students being prompted to provide a list of sources at grade 5.
Criteria fully met.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Total
WriteSteps (WriteSteps) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.) Criteria fully met.
16
Appendix A. Findings in Detail CraftPlus (Maupin House) Evaluation Category
Total
Gr. 2
Gr. 5
Common Core Writing Standard 9. Drawing Evidence from Texts
NA
Common Core Writing Standard 10. Range of Writing
NA
Explanation No evidence found that students in grade 5 draw evidence from informational texts. (Not applicable for grade 2.) Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Total
Essential Guide to Writing (Empowering Writers) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Total
Strategies for Writers (Zaner-Bloser) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
At grade 5, some science writing tasks, but no tasks in other disciplines. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
17
Appendix A. Findings in Detail Traits Writing (Scholastic) Gr. 5 Explanation
Evaluation Category
Total
Gr. 2
Common Core Writing Standard 9. Drawing Evidence from Texts
NA
Common Core Writing Standard 10. Range of Writing
NA
At grade 5, students do no writing in which they draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. (Not applicable for grade 2.) At grade 5, some ELA writing tasks, but no tasks in other disciplines. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Units of Study in Opinion, Information, and Narrative Writing (Firsthand/Heinemann) Total Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Total
WriteSteps (WriteSteps) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
NA
Criteria fully met at grade 5. (Not applicable for grade 2.)
18
Appendix A. Findings in Detail
Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction CraftPlus (Maupin House) Explanation
Evaluation Category
Total
Gr. 2
Gr. 5
Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Instruction Writing Strategies Writer's Workshop Model Process Writing Approach
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met. Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
6 Traits/6+1 Traits Model
Concise Daily Lesson Plans
Support for elements, but no use of the 6 traits framework. Criteria fully met.
Web-Based Resources
Limited availability of resources on CD only (not Web).
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Total
Essential Guide to Writing (Empowering Writers) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Total
Strategies for Writers (Zaner-Bloser) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Not much emphasis on teaching mechanics at grade 5. Criteria fully met. Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met. Criteria fully met.
Most elements of a process approach are addressed, but students are not guided to selfreflect or self-evaluate. Support for elements, but no use of the 6 traits framework.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
While daily lesson plans provided, assessment of student learning not directly addressed in most grade 2 lessons. While a few resources are provided on the website, key program resources are available only on CD, not on the Web.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
19
Appendix A. Findings in Detail
Evaluation Category
Traits Writing (Scholastic) Gr. 5 Explanation
Units of Study in Opinion, Information, and Narrative Writing (Firsthand/Heinemann) Total Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Total
Gr. 2
Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Instruction Writing Strategies
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Writer's Workshop Model Process Writing Approach 6 Traits/6+1 Traits Model
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Concise Daily Lesson Plans Web-Based Resources
Criteria fully met.
Some essential materials not available online.
Support for elements, but no use of the 6 traits framework. Lesson plans not concise. Availability of resources on CD only (not Web)
Criteria fully met. Criteria fully met. Criteria fully met. Criteria fully met.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Total
WriteSteps (WriteSteps) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Criteria fully met. Criteria fully met.
20
Appendix A. Findings in Detail CraftPlus (Maupin House) Evaluation Category Multimedia Resources for Interactive Whiteboards Formative Assessment
Explanation
Total
Strategies for Writers (Zaner-Bloser) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Total
Gr. 2
Gr. 5
No evidence of resources provided for use with IWB.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
At grade 2, students are not taught to assess their own writing. At grade 5, formative assessment is not frequently incorporated into the lessons, and there is no evidence of teachers being guided to monitor student progress over time.
Criteria fully met.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Total
Essential Guide to Writing (Empowering Writers) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
21
Appendix A. Findings in Detail
Evaluation Category
Traits Writing (Scholastic) Gr. 5 Explanation
Units of Study in Opinion, Information, and Narrative Writing (Firsthand/Heinemann) Total Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Total
Gr. 2
Multimedia Resources for Interactive Whiteboards
Criteria fully met.
Formative Assessment
Criteria fully met.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Some resources provided that could be used with IWB, but no guidance given on how to use with IWB. Criteria fully met.
Total
WriteSteps (WriteSteps) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
22
Appendix A. Findings in Detail
Professional Development CraftPlus (Maupin House) Evaluation Category
Explanation
Total
Strategies for Writers (Zaner-Bloser) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Total
Gr. 2
Gr. 5
Program Implementation Training
Criteria fully met.
Based on website information, training is not automatically provided to clients, but is provided through offsite topic-based workshops teachers can register to attend— which are not widely available across the US.
Professional Development Is Ongoing
Criteria fully met.
Coaching
No evidence found of coaching services.
Customized ongoing PD is available but not provided or promoted as the standard PD support. Criteria fully met.
Classroom Demonstration Videos
Criteria fully met.
Classroom demonstration videos were supplied, but there was no evidence of supporting features/ resources to guide teachers’ thinking and reflection.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Total
Essential Guide to Writing (Empowering Writers) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
No training supporting implementation of Strategies for Writers described. However, the publisher provides other PD services that could be customized to support this program. No evidence found of ongoing PD services to support program implementation. No evidence found of coaching services. No evidence found of classroom demonstration videos.
23
Appendix A. Findings in Detail
Evaluation Category
Traits Writing (Scholastic) Gr. 5 Explanation
Total
Gr. 2
Program Implementation Training
Professional Development Is Ongoing Coaching
Classroom Demonstration Videos
Units of Study in Opinion, Information, and Narrative Writing (Firsthand/Heinemann) Total Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
Total
WriteSteps (WriteSteps) Gr. 2 Gr. 5 Explanation
No training supporting implementation of Traits Writing described at Scholastic site. However, program author Ruth Culham (Culham Writing Company) independently provides workshops about key topics embodied in the program. No evidence found of ongoing PD.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
Criteria fully met.
No evidence found of coaching services.
Criteria fully met
Criteria fully met.
“Home-grown institutes” meet some of the criteria for coaching, but ongoing coaching as such not supported. Criteria fully met.
Relatively few classroom videos provided.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
24
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria Common Core Writing Standards and Related Instructional Features Evaluation Category Common Core Writing Standard 1. Text Type: Arguments
Grade 2 Criteria
Grade 5 Criteria
Text of standard: “Write opinion pieces in which [students] introduce the topic or book they are writing about, state an opinion, supply reasons that support the opinion, use linking words (e.g., because, and, also) to connect opinion and reasons, and provide a concluding statement or section.”
Text of standard: “Write opinion pieces on topics or texts, supporting a point of view with reasons and information. a. Introduce a topic or text clearly, state an opinion, and create an organizational structure in which ideas are logically grouped to support the writer’s purpose. b. Provide logically ordered reasons that are supported by facts and details. c. Link opinion and reasons using words, phrases, and clauses (e.g., consequently, specifically). d. Provide a concluding statement or section related to the opinion presented.”
To fully meet criteria, text type must be taught in at least 2 assignments, with guidance addressing all items in the standard. Partially meets criteria if guidance addresses some but not all items.
To fully meet criteria, text type must be taught in at least 2 assignments, with guidance addressing all items in the standard. Partially meets criteria if guidance addresses some but not all items.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
25
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Category Common Core Standard 2. Text Type: Informative/ Explanatory Texts
Grade 2 Criteria Text of standard: “Write informative/explanatory texts in which [students] introduce a topic, use facts and definitions to develop points, and provide a concluding statement or section.” To fully meet criteria, text type must be taught in at least 2 assignments, with guidance addressing all items in the standard. Partially meets criteria if guidance addresses some but not all items.
Grade 5 Criteria Text of standard: “Write informative/explanatory texts to examine a topic and convey ideas and information clearly. a. Introduce a topic clearly, provide a general observation and focus, and group related information logically; include formatting (e.g., headings), illustrations, and multimedia when useful to aiding comprehension. b. Develop the topic with facts, definitions, concrete details, quotations, or other information and examples related to the topic. c. Link ideas within and across categories of information using words, phrases, and clauses (e.g., in contrast, especially). d. Use precise language and domain-specific vocabulary to inform about or explain the topic. e. Provide a concluding statement or section related to the information or explanation presented.” To fully meet criteria, text type must be taught in at least 2 assignments, with guidance addressing all items in the standard. Partially meets criteria if guidance addresses some but not all items.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
26
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Category Common Core Writing Standard 3. Text Type: Narratives
Grade 2 Criteria Text of standard: “Write narratives in which [students] recount a well-elaborated event or short sequence of events, include details to describe actions, thoughts, and feelings, use temporal words to signal event order, and provide a sense of closure.” To fully meet criteria, text type must be taught in at least 2 assignments, with guidance addressing all items in the standard. Partially meets criteria if guidance addresses some but not all items.
Student Samples for Text Types
To fully meet criteria, the program must provide gradespecific samples of student writing for each of the 3 Common Core text types, illustrating characteristics of that text type as described in the Common Core Writing Standards. The samples must be presented as models to students, who should be guided to analyze and emulate features of the models.
Grade 5 Criteria Text of standard: “Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, descriptive details, and clear event sequences. a. Orient the reader by establishing a situation and introducing a narrator and/or characters; organize an event sequence that unfolds naturally. b. Use narrative techniques, such as dialogue, description, and pacing, to develop experiences and events or show the responses of characters to situations. c. Use a variety of transitional words, phrases, and clauses to manage the sequence of events. d. Use concrete words and phrases and sensory details to convey experiences and events precisely. e. Provide a conclusion that follows from the narrated experiences or events.” To fully meet criteria, text type must be taught in at least 2 assignments, with guidance addressing all items in the standard. Partially meets criteria if guidance addresses some but not all items. Same as grade 2.
Partially meets criteria if some samples are provided to students as models, but they are not provided for each text type or are not consistently shared with students as models. IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
27
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Category Rubrics for Text Types
Common Core Writing Standard 4. Appropriate Development, Organization, & Style
Common Core Writing Standard 5. Planning and Revision Process
Grade 2 Criteria To fully meet criteria, the program must provide rubrics that are specific to each of the 3 Common Core text types. Rubrics must be shared with students as a guide to their own writing and revision, and teachers must be guided to use the rubrics to assess student writing. Partially meets criteria if rubrics are provided, but (a) they are not text type-specific or (b) there is guidance to use them for student instruction or assessment, but not both. Writing Standard 4 does not apply until grade 3.
Text of standard: “With guidance and support from adults and peers, focus on a topic and strengthen writing as needed by revising and editing.” To fully meet criteria, lessons or guidance must be provided to students on a writing process that includes a topic focus, a first draft, and a revision/editing phase. Partially meets criteria if program provides lessons/guidance for some but not all of the 3 Common Core text types.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
Grade 5 Criteria Same as grade 2.
Text of standard: “Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development and organization are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.” (Grade-specific expectations for writing types are defined in #1–3 above.) To fully meet criteria, guidance must be provided to develop writing that is appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. Text of standard: “With guidance and support from peers and adults, develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach.” To fully meet criteria, lessons or guidance must be provided to students on a writing process that includes planning, a first draft, and a second draft, at a minimum. Partially meets criteria if program provides lessons/guidance for some but not all of the 3 Common Core text types.
28
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Category Common Core Writing Standard 6. Use of Technology
Grade 2 Criteria
Grade 5 Criteria
Text of standard: “With guidance and support from adults, use a variety of digital tools to produce and publish writing, including in collaboration with peers.”
Text of standard: “With some guidance and support from adults, use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish a minimum of two pages of writing (using the keyboard) as well as to interact and collaborate with others.”
To fully meet criteria, at least 2 planned writing experiences (individual or collaborative) must use wordprocessing or other software to produce a final piece of writing. Partially meets criteria if only 1 experience or if only mentioned as an option.
Common Core Writing Standard 7. Research Projects
Common Core Writing Standard 8. Gathering, Assessing, and Integrating Information
Text of standard: “Participate in shared research and writing projects (e.g., read a number of books on a single topic to produce a report; record science observations).” To fully meet criteria, students are guided through the process of collecting information and turning it into a written product, and complete at least 2 shorter projects or 1 unit-length (multi-week) project involving multiple sources, either individually or collaboratively. Partially meets criteria if guidance is lacking and/or if there is only 1 shorter project. Text of standard: “Recall information from experiences or gather information from provided sources to answer a question.” To fully meet criteria, students review provided sources to answer a question, then share the answer. Partially meets criteria if students answer questions based on experiences only, not from provided sources.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
To fully meet criteria, students must use wordprocessing or other software to produce a final piece of writing, and must use technology to share, collaborate, and/or provide or get feedback on writing. Partially meets criteria if only 1 of these or if use of technology is only mentioned as an option. Text of standard: “Conduct short research projects that use several sources to build knowledge through investigation of different aspects of a topic.” To fully meet criteria, students are guided through the process of collecting information and turning it into a written product. They also complete at least 2 shorter projects or 1 unit-length (multi-week) project involving multiple sources and addressing multiple aspects of a topic. Partially meets criteria if guidance is lacking and/or if there is only 1 shorter project. Text of standard: “Recall relevant information from experiences or gather relevant information from print and digital sources; summarize or paraphrase information in notes and finished work, and provide a list of sources.” To fully meet criteria, students summarize/paraphrase information from print/digital sources in notes and in a finished work, and provide a list of sources. Partially meets criteria if students summarize/paraphrase information from print/digital sources in a finished work, but don’t meet one or both of the other criteria. 29
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Category Common Core Writing Standard 9. Drawing Evidence from Texts
Common Core Writing Standard 10. Range of Writing
Grade 2 Criteria Writing Standard 9 does not apply until grade 4.
Writing Standard 10 does not apply until grade 3.
Grade 5 Criteria Text of standard: “Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research. a. Apply grade 5 Reading standards to literature (e.g., ‘Compare and contrast two or more characters, settings, or events in a story or a drama, drawing on specific details in the text [e.g., how characters interact]’). b. Apply grade 5 Reading standards to informational texts (e.g., ‘Explain how an author uses reasons and evidence to support particular points in a text, identifying which reasons and evidence supports which point[s]).’” To fully meet criteria, students complete at least 2 projects involving analysis, reflection, and/or research based on evidence from literary texts, and 2 projects based on evidence from informational texts. Partially meets criteria if students do only one or the other. Text of standard: “Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection, and revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of discipline-specific tasks, purposes, and audiences.” To fully meet criteria, students complete both short-term writing lessons/activities and multi-day writing projects related to at least 2 disciplines (e.g., ELA, science, social studies), typical of tasks students might be assigned as part of subject-area instruction. Partly meets criteria if students do this in only 1 subject area.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
30
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria
Other Aspects of Writing Curriculum and Instruction Evaluation Category Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Instruction
Writing Strategies
Writer’s Workshop Model
Process Writing Approach
Evaluation Criteria To fully meet criteria: a. Students are expected to create writing products that adhere to appropriate standards of grammar, usage, mechanics, and spelling for their age. b. Students are taught appropriate skills related to grammar, usage, and mechanics in a way that helps them apply those standards to their own writing. Partly meets criteria if (a) is met, but (b) is not met, or (b) is addressed in a non-writing context. To fully meet criteria, students are consistently taught strategies for carrying out assigned writing tasks (e.g., planning and revising a specific type of text) and reminded of these strategies as appropriate. Partially meets criteria if students are sometimes taught such strategies but this is not a consistent feature of instruction (e.g., students are sometimes told expectations but not given strategies on how to carry them out). To fully meet criteria, must include all of the following elements: a. Frequent opportunities for students to write—daily or almost daily b. Student selection of topics c. Explicit teaching of skills and strategies through mini-lessons, often including teacher demonstrations/modeling d. A writing process approach e. Consulting with individual students or small groups about their writing in a workshop/conference format f. Writing for an audience, including sharing of writing with other students Partially meets criteria if it includes a, c, d, and e, but not b and/or f. To fully meet criteria, must include all of the following elements: a. Extended opportunities for writing b. Writing for real audiences extending beyond the teacher c. Personalized individual assistance and instruction d. Engaging in cycles of planning, writing, and reviewing e. Self-reflection and/or self-evaluation Partially meets criteria if it includes a and d, but not one or more of the others.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
31
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria
Evaluation Category 6 Traits/6+1 Traits Model
Concise Daily Lesson Plans
Web-Based Resources
Multimedia Resources for Interactive Whiteboards Formative Assessment
Evaluation Criteria To fully meet criteria, rubrics/evaluation criteria for student writing must incorporate the 6 traits/6+1 traits model, and students must be taught the model as a framework for evaluating and revising their own work. The model must be integrated with process writing instruction, and students must be provided with guidance/strategies on how to revise writing to improve each of the traits. Partially meets criteria if rubrics/evaluation criteria reflect the traits, but they are not taught or used as a framework. “A successful lesson plan addresses and integrates these three key components: Objectives for student learning Teaching/learning activities Strategies to check student understanding” (Milkova, 2012, para. 1; see also Stronge, 2007) To fully meet criteria, daily lesson plans must be provided that include clear objectives, description of activities, and regular assessment of student learning. Lesson plans must be concise for teacher convenience (i.e., no longer than 4 pages). Partially meets criteria if lesson plans are provided but lack some of these characteristics. To fully meet criteria, teachers and/or students must be able to access all resources on the Web that are needed to implement the program. Partially meets criteria if teachers can access planning and presentation resources on the Web, but some resources are not accessible on the Web. Also partially meets criteria if resources are available on CD but not on the Web. To fully meet criteria, the program provides ample resources for use with interactive whiteboards. Resources focus on key content and are engaging (i.e., likely to stimulate student-teacher and student-student interaction). Partially meets criteria if resources are provided but fall short in one or more areas. To fully meet criteria, students receive feedback on their writing from peers and/or teachers; students are taught to assess their own writing; and teachers are guided to monitor students’ progress in writing across multiple assessments. Partially meets criteria if feedback is provided, but one or both of the other conditions are not met (i.e., self-assessment, monitoring across multiple assessments).
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
32
Appendix B. Evaluation Criteria
Professional Development Evaluation Category
Evaluation Criteria
Program Implementation Training
To fully meet criteria, the program vendor provides training for teachers in program features and resources and program implementation. Partially meets criteria if training covers some but not all of these areas or if it is provided only for a limited number of personnel. Professional Development Is To fully meet criteria, the program vendor provides substantial ongoing follow-up training for teachers. Partially Ongoing meets criteria if only 1-2 follow-up sessions are provided/recommended. Coaching To fully meet criteria, the program vendor provides coaching services, which are: Job-embedded (i.e., takes place during the regular school day and school calendar) Ongoing Conducted with individual teachers or instructionally meaningful groups of teachers (e.g., grade-level or subject-area groups) Focused on teachers' own implementation of the program with their students (e.g., involving analysis of data from participants’ own students; observations and feedback on classroom lessons taught by participants; review of participants' lesson plans; collective/collaborative planning; “debriefing” on participants' experience teaching with the program) Conducted in real time (on-site, online, or both)
Classroom Demonstration Videos
Partially meets criteria if some but not all of these are supported. To fully meet criteria, the program vendor provides a substantial body of classroom videos demonstrating real instruction, with supporting features/resources to guide teachers' thinking and reflection. These could include key questions, annotations, advance organizers, and/or prompting to teachers to reflect on what they saw—provided either as part of the video or in supporting materials. Partially meets criteria if fewer than 9 videos are provided, or videos are provided but without supporting features/resources to guide teachers’ thinking and reflection.
IESD White Paper: Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core, 11/2013
33
13 Things Teachers Say They Want in a Writing Program
Student Samples for Text Types Rubrics for Text Types
Writing Curriculum and Instruction Grammar, Usage, and Mechanics Instruction Writer’s Workshop Model 6 Traits/6+1 Traits Model Concise Daily Lesson Plans Web-Based Resources Multimedia Resources for Interactive Whiteboards Formative Assessment
Professional Development PD: Program Implementation Training PD: Classroom Demonstration Videos
y f Stud nits o ns’ U Calki Lucy
Addresses the 3 Common Core Text Types
riters for W
Addresses All Common Core Writing Standards
g Writin
egies
iting
Common Core Writing Standards
Traits
Strat
to Wr
= criteria not met
lus
P Craft
= criteria partially met
uide tial G
Essen
= criteria fully met
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • •
• • • • • • •
• • • • • • •
• • • • • • •
• • • • • • •
• • • • • • •
• • • • • • •
• • • • • • • • • • • •
The comparison table is based on the white paper, “Elementary Writing Programs: How They Match the Research and the Common Core” created by Interactive Educational Systems Designs, Inc. IESD, an education research company, analyzed six elementary writing programs to determine how they met the requirements of the Common Core State Standards in writing, evidence-based best practices, and common expectations from teachers and administrators. The white paper was sponsored by WriteSteps, however, IESD undertook the evaluation as an independent research project and all research and evaluations were performed independently. WriteSteps did not participate in developing the findings contained in the white paper. Information in the white paper is accurate as of November 2013.
Was the content of this session helpful? 1
2
3
4
5
6
Was the speaker knowledgeable? 1
2
3
4
5
6
Comments:_______________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________ Name: ___________________________________________________________ School name: ___________________________________________________ City: _____________________________________________________________ State: ___________________________________________________________ Email address: ___________________________________________________
