Preparing for the Common Core
Steven M. Baule, ED.D., PH.D. Superintendent, North Boone CUSD 200 1750 students, preK-12, 6 buildings 38% low income, 8% ESL, 11% mobility 23% Hispanic, 71% White
Prior to 2010 Textbook or individual teacher drive curriculum Good K-8 scores; poor HS scores on standardized tests (common theme in Illinois) Had a Board level curriculum committee; district committee focused on Formative Common Assessment, but without end goals clearly articulated Small rural district; preK-12, 1800 students
First Steps Identified the need to address the CCSS with all staff Tried to instill this was not the “newest fad” to shortly disappear More difficult to get the elementary level to see the need for change
SET UP DISTRICT CURRICULUM COMMITTEES • Clearly identified goals • Made up of teachers, administrators and an outside consultant to assist the committee • Unpacked the CC standards; set learning targets; developed I Can statements • Developed K-12 Scope and Sequence
DISSEMINATE THE NEW CURRICULUM • Provide district, building and grade/department level inservices • Determine the necessary instructional materials (text book adoption is only a part of it) • Utilize MAP/Common Core MAP to assist in benchmarking needs and program evaluation • Provide teacher inservices in using data effectively
SAMPLE I CAN STATEMENTS I can use data from a random sample to draw inferences about a population with an unknown characteristic of interest. (7.SP.2) I can informally assess the degree of visual overlap of two numerical data distributions with similar variabilities, measuring the difference between the centers by expressing it as a multiple of a measure of variability. (7.SP.3) I can use measures of center and measures of variability for numerical data from random samples to draw informal comparative inferences about two populations. (7.SP.4)
ASSESS IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW CURRICULUM • Focus teacher observations on new expectations • Utilize MAP/Common Core MAP to assist in identifying staff development needs • Use Compass/MAP integration to support differentiation (grades 1-10) • Continued focus on CCSS during all institutes • Hired ECRA (Rosemont, IL) to assist in data analysis and program review • Working on preparing infrastructure for PARCC • Returning to one desktop lab in each elementary for testing (MAP & PARCC)
WHAT WE NEED TO DO BETTER • Using interventions to fill in instructional and individual student gaps • Less reliance on single resources to support instruction • Creating common assessments (according to ECRA, these will shortly be available commercially) • Complete improvement of our infrastructure (Internet access and WAN)
KEY CONSIDERATIONS • Curriculum development must include both internal staff to facilitate buy-in and external resources to challenge the group • Must support development of teacher skills in both assessment and data analysis (pre-service education provides neither in most cases) • Less reliance on single resources to support instruction will require additional training and support • Improvement of infrastructure will almost certainly be required
QUESTIONS?
Prior to 2010 Textbook or individual teacher drive curriculum Good K-8 scores; poor HS scores on standardized tests (common theme in Illinois) Had a Board level curriculum committee; district committee focused on Formative Common Assessment, but without end goals clearly articulated Small rural district; preK-12, 1800 students
First Steps Identified the need to address the CCSS with all staff Tried to instill this was not the “newest fad” to shortly disappear More difficult to get the elementary level to see the need for change
SET UP DISTRICT CURRICULUM COMMITTEES • Clearly identified goals • Made up of teachers, administrators and an outside consultant to assist the committee • Unpacked the CC standards; set learning targets; developed I Can statements • Developed K-12 Scope and Sequence
DISSEMINATE THE NEW CURRICULUM • Provide district, building and grade/department level inservices • Determine the necessary instructional materials (text book adoption is only a part of it) • Utilize MAP/Common Core MAP to assist in benchmarking needs and program evaluation • Provide teacher inservices in using data effectively
SAMPLE I CAN STATEMENTS I can use data from a random sample to draw inferences about a population with an unknown characteristic of interest. (7.SP.2) I can informally assess the degree of visual overlap of two numerical data distributions with similar variabilities, measuring the difference between the centers by expressing it as a multiple of a measure of variability. (7.SP.3) I can use measures of center and measures of variability for numerical data from random samples to draw informal comparative inferences about two populations. (7.SP.4)
ASSESS IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NEW CURRICULUM • Focus teacher observations on new expectations • Utilize MAP/Common Core MAP to assist in identifying staff development needs • Use Compass/MAP integration to support differentiation (grades 1-10) • Continued focus on CCSS during all institutes • Hired ECRA (Rosemont, IL) to assist in data analysis and program review • Working on preparing infrastructure for PARCC • Returning to one desktop lab in each elementary for testing (MAP & PARCC)
WHAT WE NEED TO DO BETTER • Using interventions to fill in instructional and individual student gaps • Less reliance on single resources to support instruction • Creating common assessments (according to ECRA, these will shortly be available commercially) • Complete improvement of our infrastructure (Internet access and WAN)
KEY CONSIDERATIONS • Curriculum development must include both internal staff to facilitate buy-in and external resources to challenge the group • Must support development of teacher skills in both assessment and data analysis (pre-service education provides neither in most cases) • Less reliance on single resources to support instruction will require additional training and support • Improvement of infrastructure will almost certainly be required
QUESTIONS?
