Facilitator: Robyn Madison-Harris, EdDProject Lead: Kathleen Theodore, MA

Project Team Member: Ramona Chauvin, PhD

November 29, 30, and December 1, 2011

Climbing the Staircase of Complexity: Transitioning from Awareness to Implementation

of the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts and Literacy

800-476-6861 | www.sedl.org

Copyright ©2011 by SEDL. All rights reserved.Designated staff of the state departments of education for Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, and South Carolina as well as staff in their respective school districts are granted

permission by SEDL to reproduce, distribute, and utilize this document and related handouts without modification. This copyright notice must appear on all copies that are distributed. With respect to users not specified above, no part of this document or related handouts may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or

mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from SEDL (4700 Mueller Blvd., Austin, TX 78723), or by submitting an online copyright request form at www.sedl.org/about/copyright_request.html on the SEDL Web site. Users may need to secure additional permissions from

copyright holders whose work SEDL included after obtaining permission as noted to reproduce or adapt for this document and related handouts.

ELA and Literacy CCSS Organization

SECTIONS

Standards for ELA and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects K–5

Standards for ELA 6–12

Standards for Literacy in History/SS, Science, and Technical Subjects 6–12

Supplemental Information and Explanations

ELA and Literacy CCSS Organization (Cont.)

• Appendix A – Research Supporting Key Elements of the Standards; Glossary of Key Terms

• Appendix B – Text Exemplars and Sample Performance Tasks

• Appendix C – Samples of Student Writing

Reading the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for English Language Arts/LiteracyThe CCSS for English Language Arts (ELA)/Literacy are composed of the following:

– Standards (what students understand and should be able to do)

– College and Career Ready (CCR) Anchor Standards– Strands (ELA K–12: Reading, Writing, Speaking and

Listening, and Language; 6–12 Literacy: Reading and Writing)

Source: Content on slides 5–11 from Taking a Look at the English Language Arts and Literacy Common Core Standards: A COI Discussion. Portsmouth, NH: Center on Instruction. Adapted by SEDL with permission from COI.

Standards for ELA and Literacy in History/SS, Science, and Technical Subjects K–5

Strands

Reading Writing Speaking/Listening Language

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

Informational Text K-5

Literature K-5 Foundational Skills

StrandsReading

Literature & Informational Writing Speaking/Listening Language

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

Foundational Skills

1.2.3.

4.5.6.

7.8.9.

10.

Key ideas & details

Craft & structure

Integration of knowledge & ideas

Range/level of text complexity

Print Concepts

Phonological Awareness

Phonics & Word Recognition

Fluency

1.2.3.

4.5.6.

7.8.9.

10.

1.2.3.

4.5.6.

1.2.

3.

4.5.6.

Text types & purpose

Production & distribution of writing

Research to build knowledge

Range of writing

Comprehension & collaboration

Presentation of knowledge & ideas

Conventions of standards English

Knowledge of language

Vocabulary acquisition & use

K–5 StandardsK–5 Standards

Standards for ELA 6–12

Strands

Reading Writing Speaking/Listening Language

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

Informational Text 6-12

Literature 6-12

6–12 ELA Standards

Strands

WritingSpeaking/Listening Language

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

1.2.3.

4.5.6.

7.8.9.

10.

Key ideas & details

Craft & structure

Integration of knowledge & ideas

Range/level of text complexity

1.2.3.

4.5.6.

7.8.9.

10.

1.2.3.

4.5.6.

1.2.

3.

4.5.6.

Text types & purpose

Production & distribution of writing

Research to build knowledge

Range of writing

Comprehension & collaboration

Presentation of knowledge & ideas

Conventions of standards English

Knowledge of language

Vocabulary acquisition & use

Reading(Literature & Informational Text)

Standards for Literacy in History, Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects 6–12

Strands

Reading Writing

CCR Anchor Standard

CCR Anchor Standard

Strands

CCR Anchor Standard

1.2.3.

4.5.6.

7.8.9.

10.

Key ideas & details

Craft & structure

Integration of knowledge & ideas

Range/level of text complexity

Reading Writing

CCR Anchor Standard

1.2.3.

4.5.6.

7.8.9.

10.

Text types & purpose

Production & distribution of writing

Research to build knowledge

Range of writing

6–12 Literacy in History, SS, Science, and Technology6–12 Literacy in History, SS, Science, and Technology

Integrated Model of Literacy

• Close connections between strands – Foundational reading skills equal means to end– Focus on comprehension and meaning– Text complexity and range of reading throughout– High cognitive demand

• Interdisciplinary/shared approach– Aligned with National Assessment of Educational

Progress (NAEP) reading framework– Applied throughout school, including content areas

CCSS Instructional Shifts in ELA/Literacy

• Shift 1: PK–5: Balancing Informational and Literary Text• Shift 2: 6–12: Knowledge in the Disciplines• Shift 3: Staircase of Complexity• Shift 4: Text-Based Answers• Shift 5: Writing From Sources• Shift 6: Academic Vocabulary

Source: Content on slides 12–13 from Instructional Shifts for the Common Core, by EngageNY.org, 2011, Albany, NY: New York State Education Department (NYSED). Copyright 2011 by NYSED. Adapted by SEDL with permission from EngageNY. Retrieved from http://engageny.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/instructional_shifts.pdf

Focus on Shift 3: Staircase of Complexity

• To prepare students for the complexity of college and career ready texts, each grade level requires a “step” of growth on the “staircase.”

• Students read the grade-appropriate text around which instruction is centered.

• Teachers are patient, create more time and space for close, careful reading.

• Teachers provide appropriate scaffolding and supports to meet students’ instructional needs and reading levels.

Range of Reading and Level of Complexity

• Reading Standard 10

“Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.” (p. 10)

• The Progression of Reading Standard 10– Grade bands– Text complexity requirements– Scaffolding needs

Source: Content on slides 14–20 adapted by SEDL with permission from CCSSI (2010)

Rationale for Text Complexity

• Goal of this standard: Students must be able to read and comprehend independently and proficiently the kinds of complex texts commonly found in college and in careers.

• There is a reported decline in high-school level texts (ACT, 2006); while at the same time, there is an increase in the text difficulty of college and career texts (Hayes & Ward, 1992; Milewski, Johnson, Glazer, & Kubota, 2005).

Rationale for Text Complexity (Cont.)• Some educators claim that school texts have declined

overall:

“The clear, alarming picture that emerges from the [extensive body of research]. . .is that while the reading demands of college, workforce training programs, and citizenship have held steady or risen over the past fifty years or so, K–12 texts have, if anything, become less demanding.” ELA-CCSS, Appendix A, 2010, p. 2

Note: See Appendix A, pp. 2–4, for specific research studies.

CCSS’ Model of Text Complexity

A Three-Part Model for

Measuring Text Complexity:

1. Qualitative Dimensions

1. Quantitative Dimensions

1. Reader and Task

Considerations

Qualitative Dimensions

• Levels of Meaning

• Structure

• Language Conventions and Clarity

Quantitative Dimensions

• Word length or frequency

• Sentence length

• Text length

• Text cohesion

Reader and Task Considerations

• Knowledge and Cognitive Demands– Life Experiences– Cultural and Literary Knowledge– Content and Discipline Knowledge

• Mode(s) of Response– Written– Oral– Graphic

• Purpose for Reading• Degree of Scaffolding

Learning Task 1: Evaluating Texts for CCSS1. Pair up with someone at your table, preferably someone from your

district. You will have 15 minutes for this task.

2. Find the following documents in your handouts:– “Evaluating Texts for Common Core”– The Longitude Prize– “The Standards’ Grade-Specific Text Complexity Demands”

3. Use the “Evaluating Texts for Common Core” handout to evaluate the text complexity of The Longitude Prize. Omit the Quantitative Evaluation since Lexile or ATOS measures are not given for this text excerpt.

4. Use “The Standards’ Grade-Specific Text Complexity Demands” to recommend the grade-level band.

5. Be prepared to share your evaluation, recommended grade-level band, and rationale for your responses.

Learning Task 2: Reflecting on Shift 3 and Text Complexity1. Pair up with someone at your table, preferably someone from

your district, and discuss the following questions. You will have 5 minutes for this task.

a. What do the CCSS ask students to know and be able to do?

b. What changes, if any, in practice will we have to make to address Shift 3, Reading Standard 10?

c. What challenges will we face as we make this shift?

d. When was the last time I was challenged by a text, and what did I do to work within that frustration?

e. What supports will I need to provide for struggling students?

Learning Task 3: Differentiating Instruction and Scaffolding a Complex Text1. Pair up with someone at your table, preferably someone

from your district. You will have 5 minutes for this task.

2. You will need the following documents from your handouts for this task:– The Longitude Prize– Tic-Tac-Toe Choice Board

3. Choose 3 tasks to complete on the Tic-Tac-Toe Choice Board in such a way that you end up “winning” the game, across, up and down, or diagonally.

4. Be prepared to share one of your responses with the whole group.

ReferencesACT, Inc. (2006). Reading between the lines: What the ACT reveals about college

readiness in reading. Iowa City, IA: Author.

Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/the-standards/english-language-arts-standards

EngageNY (2011). Instructional shifts for the common core. Albany, NY: New York State Education Department (NYSED). Retrieved from http://engageny.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/instructional_shifts.pdf

Hayes, D. P., & Ward, M. (1992, December). Learning from texts: Effects of similar and dissimilar features of analogies in study guides. Paper presented at the 42nd Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, San Antonio, TX.

Milewski, G. B., Johnson, D., Glazer, N., & Kubota, M. (2005). A survey to evaluate the alignment of the new SAT writing and critical reading sections to curricula and instructional practices (College Board Research Report No. 2005-1/ETS RR-05-07). New York, NY: College Entrance Examination Board.

ResourcesSee the handouts for a list of resources.

For more information, contactRobyn Madison-Harris, EdD

Program Associate

Southeast Comprehensive Center at SEDL

3501 North Causeway Blvd., Suite 700

Metairie, LA 70002

800-644-8671

robyn.madison-harris@sedl.org