This document provides guidance for educators on deconstructing the Common Core State Standards in order to better understand and teach them. It begins by explaining how to align the achievement level descriptors with Bloom's revised taxonomy of cognitive processes. It then discusses transforming learners from novices to experts and providing different levels of support. Finally, it introduces the idea that standards involve two dimensions: cognitive processes and knowledge, and explores how these intersect. The overall aim is to empower teachers by helping them gain a firm understanding and command of the standards.

2. The Core Deconstructed
How to Deconstruct the Common Core State Standards So You Can Teach
ELA/Literacy Complimentary Preview
©2012 Sheron M. Brown
Unauthorized use and/or duplication of this material without express and written permission from the author and/or owner is strictly prohibited. Excerpts and links may be
used, provided that full and clear credit is given to Sheron M. Brown and EdSolutions by Design, Inc. with appropriate and specific direction to the original content.
ISBN (See standard copies.)
i

3. Preface
The project you are First: Ground
beholding represents Gain (or review) the
POWER-- power to foundational understanding
required to demystify the
own your development as a standards.
professional.
Second: Deconstruct
It also represents Engage in the process of
CONTROL--control dismantling the standards.
to gain a firm command of Third: Teach
the Common Core State Examine tools and models
Standards and all they you can use to teach the
require. standards...and teach them
well!
Dr. Brown
ii

4. C HAPTER 1
Level 2:
Grounding the Standards The second PLD states, “Students performing at this level
demonstrate a limited command of the knowledge, skills and
practices embodied by the CCSS at their grade level.” This can be
Program Level Descriptors (PLDs) were
aligned with the processes “understand” and “apply.”
developed by the Partnership for Assessment of
Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) to describe
student performance in relation to the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS). This page hosts suggestions for
aligning the PLDs with the revised Bloom’s cognitive
processes (Anderson, et al., 2001). The suggestions are
not absolutes. They provide a way for you to combine
your previous professional knowledge with this new
information.
Level 3:
The third level PLD indicates, “Students performing at this level
demonstrate a partial command of the knowledge, skills and
practices embodied by the CCSS at their grade level.” This can
be aligned with ”apply.”
Level 1:
The first PLD states, “Students performing at this level
demonstrate a very limited command of the
knowledge, skills and practices embodied by the CCSS
at their grade level.” This can be aligned with the
cognitive process “remember.”

5. Level 3:
The third level PLD indicates, “Students performing at this level demonstrate a partial command of
the knowledge, skills and practices embodied by the CCSS at their grade level.” This can be aligned
with ”apply.”
Level 4:
The fourth level PLD indicates, “Students performing at this level demonstrate a solid command of the
knowledge, skills and practices embodied by the CCSS at their grade level.” This can be aligned with
“evaluate.”
Level 5:
Lastly, the fifth level PLD indicates, “Students performing at this level demonstrate a superior
command of the knowledge, skills and practices embodied by the CCSS at their grade level.” This can
possibly be aligned with the highest cognitive process of “create.”

6. Essentially, the CCSS requires teachers to
facilitate learning that transforms learners
from novices to experts. Table 1 explains
each category.
Transform)Learners!
In the Common Core era, educators must
balance an understanding between the Table I. Increasing Levels of Cognitive Demand and Learner Behaviors
various terms of Bloom’s cognitive
processes, PLDs and expert model. The list Novice Apprentice Practitioner Expert
below suggests an alignment of the terms. • Learners experience • Learners understand how • Learners • Learners use concepts within
content concretely micro-concepts connect simultaneously and among disciplines in
Novice: • Learners manage within a discipline manage multiple micro- order to infer theories and
micro-concepts one at • Learners connect concepts principles
• Remember a time information within a • Learners construct • Learners generate
• Level 1 • Learners require micro-concept generalizations to innovations within the field
guided practice and • Learners begin explain connections and/or practice
Apprentice: skill describing between concepts • Learners rehearse skill
• Learners need generalizations and • Learners choose and development independently
• Understand reinforcement, themes that connect use appropriate skills and in order to advance self-
• Apply reassurance, and concepts for task completion improvement
guidance • Learners apply skills with • Learners seek out • Learners seek out the input
• Level 2/ 3 • Learners seek out limited supervision feedback when needed of other experts for a specific
Practitioner: confirmation that • Learners seek out • Learners demonstrate purpose
validates their confirmation at task commitment and • Learners experience the flow
• Analyze competency to completion perseverance with state and gain pleasure
complete a task • Learners reflect on reasonable challenges during task completion that
• Evaluate content and skills when • Learners reflect on requires advanced skill or
• Level 4/5 prompted content and skills to knowledge
refine understanding • Learners are independent
Expert: and performance and self-directed
• Learners seek out
• Create experiences that cause them
• Level 5 to once again advance
through the levels
Again these recommendations are not
meant to be absolutes, but rather a means
for professionals to balance all the terms Adapted from Hedrick, K and Flannagan, J. S. (2009).
relevant to the work of facilitating learning.

7. You know the cognitive
process dimensions of Bloom’s
Taxonomy: remember,
understand, apply, analyze,
evaluate and create. But there
are also the knowledge
dimensions.
KNOWLEDGE DIMENSIONS
represent the four types of
knowledge that individuals
employ when engaging in the
cognitive processes.

8. K
n
o
w
l
e
d
g
e
D
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s Adapted from Anderson, L. W. (2001).

9. Cognitive Processes
Dimension
Knowledge
Dimension
What happens when the
two dimensions
intersect?

10. COMMON CORE DECONSTRUCTED
Standard Label: The actual standard goes here. The “Common
REMEMBER/UNDERSTAND APPLY/ANALYZE EVALUATE/CREATE
Core
PLD 1 & 2 PLD 3 & 4 PLD 4 & 5 Deconstructed”
(CCD) shows
The standard The standard The standard
you how to
deconstructed for the deconstructed for the deconstructed for the break down the
Factual cognitive processes of cognitive processes of cognitive processes of
remember and understand apply and analyze in the evaluate and create in standards for
Knowledge in the factual knowledge
dimension.
factual knowledge
dimension.
the factual knowledge
dimension.
each grade
level so that
you know
The standard
deconstructed for the
The standard
deconstructed for the
The standard
deconstructed for the
immediately
Conceptual cognitive processes of cognitive processes of cognitive processes of what should be
Knowledge remember and understand apply and analyze in the evaluate and create in
taught. Students
in the conceptual conceptual knowledge the conceptual
knowledge dimension. dimension. knowledge dimension. will experience
deep learning
The standard The standard The standard daily by moving
Procedural
deconstructed for the
cognitive processes of
deconstructed for the
cognitive processes of
deconstructed for the
cognitive processes of
from novice to
Knowledge remember and understand apply and analyze in the evaluate and create in expert at every
in the procedural
knowledge dimension.
procedural knowledge
dimension.
the procedural
knowledge dimension.
grade level, on
every standard.
The standard The standard The standard
deconstructed for the deconstructed for the deconstructed for the
Metacognitive
cognitive processes of cognitive processes of cognitive processes of
Knowledge remember and understand apply and analyze in the evaluate and create in
in the metacognitive metacognitive knowledge the metacognitive
knowledge dimension. dimension. knowledge dimension.
Novice/Apprentice Apprentice/Practitioner Practitioner/Expert

11. Who$Needs$to$Know?,
Table II. The Benefits of Knowing How to Deconstruct the Core
Instructional Leaders and Curriculum Leaders Teachers
Coaches
• Instructional,leaders,and, • Curriculum,leaders,can,use, • Teachers,can,use,the,four,,
coaches,can,use,the,four, four,phases,of, phases,of,deconstruction,,
phases,of,deconstruction,to, deconstruction,to,write, along,with,a,tool,called,The$
coach,teachers,through,the, objective,stems,for, Objective$Builder,,to,write,
process,of,understanding, teachers.,Teachers,can,later, complete,objectives,that,
the,depth,of,instruction, use,the,objective,stems,to, guide,a,comprehensive,
required.,This,will,help, plan,comprehensive,day=by= lesson,design,and,built=in,
students,to,truly,master,a, day,units,that,allow, performance,tasks.,Hence,
standard. students,to,truly,master,a, aligned,assessments,are,
standard.,The,objective, ensured.
stems,can,also,guide,
teachers,on,how,to,
differentiate,for,the,varying,
levels,of,abilities,
represented,in,their,
classrooms.

12. The CCD improves effectiveness,
supports differentiation and
increases rigor.
Use the CCD to:
➡Create your pre-unit assessments
➡Modify instruction
➡Design tiered lessons for
struggling learners and advanced
learners
➡Write performance tasks
➡Meet the needs of your special
education population
➡Teach each standard deeply to
move all students from novice to
expert
➡Generate ideas quickly for
learning stations
Deliberate teaching choices made
daily will lead to deep learning.

13. C HAPTER
Wherever you begin, remember that once your students are
Teaching the Standards able to successfully perform throughout the full range of the
CCD, then they have truly mastered the standard.
After deciding how to move forward with your groups, it’s
time to design a lesson using the objective stems. The stems
You may be asking, “Now that
provide you with the starting place for writing a complete
I’ve deconstructed the
learning target or objective. A clear and complete learning
standards, now what?” Now
objective entails the cognitive process, the DCI component,
you design and teach!
the content being taught, the resource being used to facilitate
Deconstructing provides a
learning, the product of the students’ thinking and the who of
number of benefits for
the learning. A tool that can support you in managing these
designing and teaching
components is referred to as the Objective Builder.
comprehensive lessons. You
can:
When applied appropriately, the Objective Builder allows
students to have the clarity they require to perform at the level
1. Create pre-assessments using the apply/analyze column to of expectations introduced by the teacher. Furthermore, the
determine the readiness for the majority of your students. If latter portion of the Objective Builder asks students to make
the majority of your students do well, consider a brief their thinking visible by engaging in brief performance tasks--a
review then move forward to the evaluate/create column. If skill the 21st century student needs.
the majority do not do well, introduce the standard by
starting with the remember/understand column.
Given that the CCD includes the cognitive process and
2. Plan for your flexible groups by examining clusters. You the DCI, you only need to complete the learning target with
may have 2 to 7 students who indicate similar needs either the remaining components of the Objective Builder,
for enrichment or acceleration. Use the appropriate column then move on to designing your well-aligned lesson.
or cell(s) to differentiate for your small groups.
3. Individualize your differentiation for students who show a
specific need. Consider directing their tutors to that need, The Objective Builder
plan specialized assignments for class or home, or support
the student during 1-on-1 conferencing in the area(s) they
demonstrated needs.

14. Now it’s time to get to work.
DECONSTRUCT
and design.

15. In a nutshell, one purpose of the CCSS is to encourage teaching
that fosters disciplinary thinking and knowledge production.
Several excerpts from the CCSS document point to this assertion. Two excerpts follow:
“Students who are college and career ready in reading, writing, speaking, listening and
language…demonstrate independence…build strong content knowledge…respond to the
varying demands of audience, task, purpose and discipline…comprehend as well as
critique…value evidence…use technology and capably…come to understand other
perspectives and cultures” (p. 7).
“To become college and career ready, students must grapple with works of exceptional craft and thought
whose range extends across genres, cultures, and centuries. Such works offer profound insights into the
human condition and serve as models for students’ own thinking and writing. Along with high quality
contemporary works, these texts should be chosen from among seminal U.S. documents, the classics of
American literature, and the timeless dramas of Shakespeare. Through wide and deep reading of
literature and literary nonfiction of steadily increasing sophistication, students gain a reservoir of
literary and cultural knowledge, references, and images; the ability to evaluate intricate arguments; and
the capacity to surmount the challenges posed by complex texts” (p. 35).
Take another look at the second quote…

16. C
Un once g)
de pt
Tea chin
rst ua
“Tonbecome
a l
din ) college and career ready, students must grapple with works of
g)
exceptional craft and thought whose range extends
ain )
m line
s)
Do scip
across genres, cultures, and centuries. Such works
Di
e) Conceptual)
offer
ip lin s)profound insights into nderstanding)
U the human condition and serve as models
isc main
D o
D
for students’ own thinking and writing. Along with high-quality
contemporary works, these texts should be chosen from among seminal
Cogni/ve)
Process)
U.S. documents, the classics of American literature, and the timeless dramas of
Dis oma
D
Shakespeare. Through wide and deep reading of literature and literary
cip i n s
lin )
e)
Kn nonfiction of steadily increasing sophistication,
Dimowle
en dge)
students gain
sio
n)
a reservoir of literary and cultural Discipline)
Domains)
knowledge, references, and images; the ability to evaluate
intricate arguments; and the capacity to surmount the challenges posed
Co roce
Co
gn ss)
P
g
Pro ni/v
i/v
by complex texts” (p. 35). ces e)
e)
s)

17. There are many other statements in the
standards documents that point to the claim. A
close read of the document will reveal evidence
repeatedly.

18. Hundreds of research studies and thousands of books outline
how to teach to foster disciplinary thinking.
The CCD process distills multiple
Embedded&in&the&Standards&
theories by synthesizing the
essential elements of their
connecting ideas to make what Table III. The 3 Dimensions of the CCD
appears overwhelming, readily Teach Think Knowledge
applicable. • CONTRIBUTIONS: Dimensions • CONTRIBUTIONS: Making • CONTRIBUTIONS: The
of Learning; Classroom Thinking Visible; Taxonomy for Schoolwide Enrichment Model;
Instruction that Works; The Art Learning, Teaching, and Using the Parallel Curriculum
and Science of Teaching; Visible Assessing; Concept-Based Model in Urban Settings; The
Learning (these works represent Curriculum and Instruction for Parallel Curriculum (these works
hundreds more) the Thinking Classroom (these represent hundreds more)
works represent hundreds more)
• APPLICATION: The purpose of • APPLICATION: Students must • APPLICATION: Deliberate
the lesson dictates the teaching think so they can learn. The choices about disciplinary
model. For example, when choice the thinking demands thinking support the
teaching for understanding, must be deliberate. The content development of knowledge as
models that foster acquisition and major ideas of the discipline students move from being
and integration of knowledge being studied must be also be novice level learners toward
should be considered. The CCD considered deliberately. The expert level learners. The CCD’s
structure visually highlights the CCD objective stems focus on structure and objective stems
lesson’s purpose. thinking within the concepts of integrate disciplinary thinking,
the discipline. content and the advancement of
the learner.
• RELEVANCE: The teaching • RELEVANCE: The level of • RELEVANCE: The consideration
model must support the level of thinking must support the of building knowledge in the
thinking required. development of knowledge discipline supports the quest for
desired. rigor in instruction.

19. Resources to Deconstruct
COMMON CORE DECONSTRUCTED
Get the CCD template.
REMEMBER/UNDERSTAND APPLY/ANALYZE EVALUATE/CREATE
PLD 1 & 2 PLD 2 & 3 PLD 4 & 5
Factual
Knowledge
Dimension
Get dimension definitions
and examples. Conceptual
Knowledge
Dimension
Get the Discipline Procedural
Knowledge
Domains. Dimension
See how to draft
conceptual
understandings.
Metacognitive
Knowledge
Dimension
!
Novice/Apprentice Apprentice/Practitioner Practitioner/Expert
!
Objective Builder
!
Structure of Objective: Students will cognitive process the discipline domain of content focus using
resource to product in group’s size
COGNITIVE PROCESSES (Choose one)
Remember Understand Apply Analyze Evaluate Create
(Retrieve relevant (Construct meaning (Carry out or use a (Break material into its (Make judgments (Put elements together
knowledge) from instructional procedure in a given constituent parts and based on criteria and to form a coherent or
messages, including situation.) determine how the standards) functional whole;
oral written and parts relate to one reorganize elements
graphic another and to an into a new pattern or
communication) overall structure or structure)
purpose)
Recognize, identify; Interpret, clarify, Execute, carry out; Differentiate, Check, coordinate, Generate,
recall, retrieve paraphrase, represent, implement, use discriminate, detect, monitor, test; hypothesize; plan,
translate; exemplify, distinguish, focus, critique, judge design; produce,
illustrate, instantiate; select; organize, find construct
classify, categorize, coherence, integrate,
subsume; infer, outline, parse,
conclude, extrapolate, structure; attribute,
interpolate, predict; deconstruct
compare, contrast,
map, match; explain,
construct models
Novice/Apprentice Apprentice/Practitioner Practitioner/Expert
DISCIPLINE DOMAINS (Choose one)
Domain of Discipline Depth Domain of Discipline Complexity Domain of Discipline Imperatives
Depth Choices Definition Complexity Choice Definition Imperative Choices Definition
Language of the Terms, nomenclature Change over Time Past, present, future; Origin The beginning, root, or
Discipline used by the across, during various source of an idea or
disciplinarian or expert time periods; change event
(or used within a
discipline)
Big Idea Broad conclusions Multiple Differing points of Contribution The significant part or
www.edsolutionsbydesign.com
(Generalization, based on evidence; Perspectives view; opinions based result of an idea or
Principle, Theory, or rules based on tested on varied roles and event
Concept) and accepted facts or responsibilities;
assumptions; basic attitudes when
truths, laws or considering or viewing
assumptions
Patterns Designs, models, Across Disciplines Connections, Convergence The coming together
recurring elements, relationships within, or meeting point of
cycles, order, between, and among events or ideas
composite of various disciplines or
characteristics subject areas
Rules Standards, Parallel Ideas or events that
organizational are similar and can be
patterns, structure, compared to one
order another
Trends Changes over time; Paradox The contradictory
general tendency of elements in an event
direction, drift; or idea
influences over time
Get the
causing effects to
happen
Join a community of educators
Unanswered Knowledge yet to be
Questions discovered, explored,
proven; unclear
information needing
Objective
further evidence or
who are deconstructing. Click
support
Essential Details Features, attributes,
elements, specific
information,
elaboration,
Builder here to share your deconstructed
embellishment
Ethics Value-laden ideas,
information; ideas
opinions related to
bias, prejudice,
standard with educators across
discrimination
©"2010"EdSolutions"by"Design." " .""
country.

20. References
Anderson, L.W., Krathwaohl, D. R., Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J. & Wittrock, M.C. (2001).
A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (Abridged ed.).
New York: Longman.
Common Core State Standards Initiative. (2010, June). Preparing America’s students for college & career. Retrieved from
http://www.corestandards.org
Dean, C. B., Hubbell, E. R., Pitler, H. & Stone, B. (2012). Classroom instruction that works: Research-based strategies for increasing
student achievement. (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Erickson, H. L. (2007). Concept-based curriculum and instruction for the thinking classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analysis relating to achievement. New York: Routledge.
Kaplan, S. N., Guzman, I., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2009). Using the parallel curriculum model in urban settings: Grades k-8. Thousand Oaks,
CA: Corwin Press.
PARCC Proposal. (2012, August). PARCC college-ready determination policy in English and mathematics & policy and general
content claims for PARCC performance levels. Retrieved from http://www.parcconline.org/sites/parcc/files/
PARCCDraftCRDPolicyandPolicyandGeneralContentClaimsforPLDs7_12_12.pdf
Hedrick, K., & Flannagan, J.S. (2009). Ascending intellectual demand in the parallel curriculum model. In C. A. Tomlinson, S. N. Kaplan, J.
S. Renzulli, J. H. Purcell, J. H. Leppien, D. E. Burns, C.A. Strickland &, M. B. Imbeau (2nd ed.). The parallel curriculum: A design to develop
learner potential and challenge advanced learners (pp. 233-293). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Marzano, R. J. (2007). The art and science of teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective instruction. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Marzano, R. J., Pinkering, D. J., Arredondo, D. E., Blackburn, G. J., Brandt, R. S., Moffet, C. A., Paynter, D. E., Pollock, J. E., & Whisler, J.
S. (1997). Dimensions of learning. (2nd ed.) Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Renzulli, J. S. & Reis, S. M. (1997). The schoolwide enrichment model; A how-to guide for educational excellence. (2nd ed.). Mansfield
Center, CT: Creative Learning Press.
Ritchhart, R., Church, M. & Morrison, K. (2011). Making thinking visible: How to promote engagement, understanding, and independence for
all learners. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

21. Images Courtesy of:
adamr “Tablet Computer and Book”
aopsan “Empty Blackboard With Wooden Frame”
jannoon028 “Business Hand Holding Show”
Keerati “Opened Laptop”
Mr. Lightman “Brain Design By Cogs and Gears”
Ohmega1982 “Social Networking Concept”
Scottchan “Wooden Sign,” “Achievement Road Sign,” “Blackboard with Chalks”
Stuart Miles“Pointing Future on Blackboard, Opportunity Definition Button,
at FreeDigitalPhotos.net

22. Sheron Brown, PhD, is founder and Chief
Performance Strategist at EdSolutions by
Design. At EdSolutions, Dr. Brown partners
with school leaders to facilitate the creation of
school excellence plans and organizational
learning plans. Dr. Brown also designs tools that
help good educators become great educators.
Dr. Brown is a passionate change agent and
systems-thinker who supports leaders in
achieving excellence through the development
of their people and through continuous
improvement. She has served as a classroom
teacher, building-level leader, district leader,
professional developer, instructional coach,
leadership coach, adjunct professor, and a
Baldrige Examiner. You can find her on
www.sheronbrownphd.com or connect with her
on www.linkedin.com/in/sheronbrownphd.

23. www.edsolutionsbydesign.com
Big dreams. Comprehensive strategy. Connected tools. Desired results.