COMMON CORE STATE
STANDARDS AND THE
SPECIAL EDUCATOR: WHAT
YOU NEED TO KNOW
Frank Donavan, Ed.D.
October 8, 2013
Agenda
• Overview--Refresher
• Common Core State Standards
• Assessment Systems
• Resources and Support Materials
• Develo...
HISTORICAL OVERVIEW—
FEDERAL PERSPECTIVE
History of Special Education
• 1975: PL 94-142—EAHCA
• Child Find
• FAPE for All Students
• LRE
• 1977: CA Master Plan
• S...
History of Special Education (cont.)
• 1990s: FAPE & LRE
• Case Law
• 1997: IDEA Reauthorized
• Access to Gen. Ed. Curricu...
History of Special Education (cont.)
• 2003: CAPA
• Accountability for Mod to Severe
• 2004: IDEA Reauthorized
• Greater E...
Progression of Guidance and Structure
for Standards-Instructionally Based
IEPs
Lack of Guidance/Structure
Increasing
Guida...
COMMON CORE STATE
STANDARDS
Common Core State Standards
(CCSS)
•

•

•

Standards are for
• (a) College and Career Readiness, and
• (b) K-12 – FOR ALL...
CCSS Themes
• College and Career Readiness (CCR)
• 21st Century Learning
• Learning and Innovation Skills
• Life and Caree...
Are the CCSS for ELA Similar to our Current
Standards?
• Existing ELA: Four Categories Called Domains
• Reading
• Writing
...
Literacy Across the Content Areas
• Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science,

and Technical Subjects are...
Are the CCSS for Math Similar to our Current
Standards?
• Shift in Grade Level for some Skills
• Organization is Different...
ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS
How Did We Get Here?
Five Assessment Consortia
• Race-to-the-Top Regular Assessment Consortia
 Partnership for Assessment...
SBAC Assessment System
Format
• Computer Adaptive
Testing (CAT)
• Computer Based
Testing (CBT)
• Paper and Pencil
• Access...
The SBAC Assessment System
English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 – 8 and High School

Last 12 weeks of year*

DI...
NCSC Overview
(Not Yet Officially Adopted in CA)
• Building consensus on what College and Career

Ready means for students...
The NCSC
Alternate Assessment System*
English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3–8 and High School

DIGITAL LIBRARY o...
LEARNING MAPS VERSUS
LEARNING PROGRESSIONS
Progressions
• Vertical progression
toward learning target
• Sequenced building
blocks
• Research-based
• Linked to high-q...
Uses percentages to
make straightforward
comparisons
Uses the symbols =,
< and > to order
numbers and make
comparisons
Use...
Maps Allow for the Integration of
Multiple Skills…
Equal
quantity

Compare two
quantities up to
ten using
models

Identify
more
number of

Use
perceptual
subitizing

Identif...
Learning Progressions vs. Learning Maps
Centralizes notion
of “superhighway”

Delineates multiple
pathways
RESOURCES AND
SUPPORT MATERIALS
CCSS Spirals
• Anchor Standards—Progress Through Multiple Grade Levels
• Skills Build Upon Prior Grade Levels
• http://cta...
Reading Standards for Literacy in Science and
Technical Subjects (RST): Standard 2
RST.2

Anchor Standard: Determine centr...
Reading Standards for Literacy in Science and Technical
Subjects (RST): Standard 1
RST.1

Anchor Standard: Read closely to...
Key Ideas and Details: Standard 1
6, [7], 8 Cite [several pieces of] textual evidence that most strongly support
analysis ...
National Center and State Collaborative
• Instructional Resources
• Aligned to the CCSS
• Curriculum Resources
• Classroom...
Instructional Resources
• Curriculum Resource Guide
• Instructional Units
• Graduated Understandings
• Instructional Resou...
Curriculum Resources
• Explain How to Teach Students Including those

with Significant Disabilities
• Based on Universal D...
Classroom Solutions
• Instructional Units
• UDL Strategies
• Multiple Means of Engagement, Representation and

Expression
...
Progress Indicator: E.NO.1a
Core Content
Connectors: K

showing mastery of the prerequisite core skills of cardinality, co...
College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading
Key Ideas and Details
1. Read closely to determine what the text...
Sample Script (Model, Lead, Test)
What is included in IR Guide?
• Overview of Systematic Instruction
• Importance of Finding a Response Mode
• Explanation o...
Instructional
Resource Guide
Career
College

Community

Curriculum
Common Core
Standards
Learning Progressions
Core Content
Connectors

Instruction
Gra...
HOW CAN WE TIE ALL OF
THIS TOGETHER?
What are Other States Doing to Assist
Students with Mild, Moderate and Severe
Needs?
• Universal Design for Learning (UDL)...
UDL Strategies for Instruction
•Strategies and lessons are taken from the general

education curriculum.
•Principles of UD...
UDL Strategies (cont.)
• All strategies/lessons are modified and or

adapted for Emerging Readers and Emerging
Communicato...
Universal Design for Learning
• UDL is a Set of Principles that Provides All Students

Equal Opportunities to Learn
• Reco...
Depth of Knowledge
• Level 1 = Recall & Reproductions
• Specific Facts, Definitions, Routine Procedures
• Level 2 = Skills...
Depth of Knowledge (DOK)
Level 1—Recall and Reproduction
Teacher

Student

• Directs

• Responds

• Shows

• Remembers

• ...
Depth of Knowledge (DOK)
Level 2—Skills and Concepts
Teacher

Student

• Shows

• Solves Problems

• Observes

• Calculate...
Depth of Knowledge (DOK)
Level 3—Strategic Reasoning
Teacher

Student

• Probes

• Discusses

• Clarifies

• Debates

• Gu...
Depth of Knowledge (DOK)
Level 4—Extended Reasoning
Teacher

Student

• Facilitates

• Designs

• Reflects

• Takes Risks
...
Depth of Knowledge--Activities
• Level 1 = Recall & Reproductions
• Concept Map, Timeline, Keywords, Chart, Recite Facts, ...
The Least Dangerous Assumption
We assume that students with the most significant cognitive
disabilities are competent and ...
DEVELOPING IEP GOALS
BASED ON THE CCSS
Developing Goals Based on the CCSS
Developing Instructionally Appropriate
IEPs?
• An Instructionally Appropriate IEP describes a process in

which the IEP te...
Current Practice
• IEP Team Identifies Unique Needs
• Unique Needs Are Often Discussed Without Reference to

Grade-Level S...
Best Practice
• Identify Student’s Unique Needs in Relation to the CCSS
• Develop Present Levels Based on Unique Needs and...
Developing Goals Based on the CCSS
• Use Grade-Level Standards
• Examine the Essential Content and Skills within that

Sta...
Consider All Areas
• Environmental Situations
• Social Interactions
• Behavioral Needs
• Prerequisite Skills
• Curriculum ...
Access to the General Education
Curriculum
• An IEP must include “a statement of measurable annual

goals, including acade...
Developing Goals and Objectives Based on the
CCSS and Specially Designed Instruction

IEP Goal
Unwrapping the Standards, or Putting the
“I” in CCSS
• Individualizing Grade-Level Standards
• Select the Standard Based o...
A Word or Two About Present Levels of
Performance
• PLOPS are Always Directly Related to the Goal
• Always Include a Stren...
Example of PLOP
• PLOP: Based on scores on the WJ (list reading or spelling

scores) and curriculum-based measures (list C...
Example of PLOP (continued)
• PLOP: Based on scores on the WJ (list reading or spelling

scores) and curriculum-based meas...
What is the difference between
the Traditional and Instructionally Appropriate IEP?
Traditional IEP
•

•

Focused on acqui...
What are the benefits of a
Instructionally Appropriate IEP?
•
•
•

•

•
•

Ties the IEP to the general education curriculu...
Does an Instructionally Appropriate IEP imply that the
student is on grade-level in that content area?
• No, the student m...
Instructionally Appropriate IEP
• Developing the Present Level of Academic

Achievement and Functional Performance (PLOP)
...
Step 1: Review the Grade-Level
Standards
• All members of the IEP team, including parents, should become

familiar with th...
Step 2: Examine Classroom and Student
Data
Analyze the student’s performance relative to grade-level
Common Core standards...
Step 2: Examine Classroom and Student
Data
• Ask:
• What can the IEP team learn from the data about the student’s
•
•
•
•
...
Step 3: Writing the PLOP
• Describe individual strengths and needs of the student in
•

•
•
•

relation to accessing the g...
Step 3: Writing the PLOP
• Ask:
• What are the grade-level content standards?
• What is the student’s performance in relat...
PLOP Quick Check
• Is the information educationally valuable and written in a

user-friendly fashion?
• Does the baseline ...
Instructionally Appropriate
Individualized Education Program
(IEP):
Developing Instructionally-Appropriate Measurable Annu...
Components of Annual Goals
Student
Who
Timeframe

Length of Time

Conditions

Under What
Conditions

Behavior

Will Do Wha...
Components of Annual Goals
• Ask:
• Does the goal have a specific time frame?
• Are the conditions for meeting the goal ad...
IEP GOAL DEVELOPMENT
AND INSTRUCTIONAL
ALIGNMENT
Aligning IEPs to the Common Core State Standards for
Students with Moderate and Severe Disabilities (Courtade &
Browder, 2...
There’s an App for That….
CCSS App by SCOE
Common Core Standards
(by Mastery Connect)
CCSS App
IEP Goal Development and Instructional
Alignment—Based on CCSS
1. Identify the student’s present level of academic
achieve...
CCSS Goal and Instructional Strategies
Alignment Tool
• CCSS Standard
• Possible Goal Areas
• Instructional Strategies
• A...
CCSS Goal and Instructional Strategies
Framework
• Standard
• Goal
• Goal Format (Given—Will—Measured By)
• Mild

Moderate...
What is the Current Status?
• CCSS Goals Statewide Work Group
• CA Standards-aligned IEP Project (CSIP)
• Tools & Resource...
What are the Key Areas to Consider in
Making the Transition?
• Digital Divide
• Curriculum Alignment
• CCSS Anchor Standar...
What Happens to the CMA?
• CMA—Science for Grades 5, 8 and 10
• Will continue as part of the CMAPP beginning 2013-14 until...
When Do We Start Using the SBAC?
• SBAC for 2013-14 will Field Tested in Both ELA and Math
• Will Include CMA Students
• S...
What About the CAPA?
• The CAPA Continues to be our State Test for students

with significant disabilities (one percent) a...
How Do We Document the in our IEPs?
• At this time, how we document State Testing in our IEPs is
•
•
•

•

a Local Decisio...
What About Digital Goal Banks?
• There are Many Private Vendors Available
• CDE Workgroup
• Complete Tool Kit and Resource...
Questions?
Additional Resources
• http://www.ocde.us/CommonCoreCA/Pages/default
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

.aspx
http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/s...
Ccss and the special educator(10 8-13) (1)
Ccss and the special educator(10 8-13) (1)
Ccss and the special educator(10 8-13) (1)
Ccss and the special educator(10 8-13) (1)
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Ccss and the special educator(10 8-13) (1)

1,771 views

Published on

Common Core for the Special Educator

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
1 Like
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,771
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
5
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
25
Comments
0
Likes
1
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Ccss and the special educator(10 8-13) (1)

  1. 1. COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS AND THE SPECIAL EDUCATOR: WHAT YOU NEED TO KNOW Frank Donavan, Ed.D. October 8, 2013
  2. 2. Agenda • Overview--Refresher • Common Core State Standards • Assessment Systems • Resources and Support Materials • Developing IEP Goals Based on the CCSS • Goal-Instruction Alignment • Questions
  3. 3. HISTORICAL OVERVIEW— FEDERAL PERSPECTIVE
  4. 4. History of Special Education • 1975: PL 94-142—EAHCA • Child Find • FAPE for All Students • LRE • 1977: CA Master Plan • SELPAs • Fiscal, Procedural, Compliance, Programs • 1980s: ?????? • Lack of Consistency • Random Acts of Greatness • Case Law
  5. 5. History of Special Education (cont.) • 1990s: FAPE & LRE • Case Law • 1997: IDEA Reauthorized • Access to Gen. Ed. Curriculum • Increase in Litigation • 1998: CA Content Standards • CSTs, API • 2001: NCLB • Subgroups • Accountability • Increase in Litigation
  6. 6. History of Special Education (cont.) • 2003: CAPA • Accountability for Mod to Severe • 2004: IDEA Reauthorized • Greater Emphasis on Core Curriculum and • Access to Typical Peers • Research-Based Practices • 2007: CMA • 2010: OSEP—Focus on Outcomes • 2014: Results Driven Accountability (RDA) • 2014-15: CCSS
  7. 7. Progression of Guidance and Structure for Standards-Instructionally Based IEPs Lack of Guidance/Structure Increasing Guidance/Structure StandardsInstructionally Based
  8. 8. COMMON CORE STATE STANDARDS
  9. 9. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) • • • Standards are for • (a) College and Career Readiness, and • (b) K-12 – FOR ALL STUDENTS Standards are research and evidence-based, reflective of rigorous content and skills, and internationally benchmarked. Addition of 15% more information to the CCSS for each subject • Includes additional information to address perceived gaps • Ensures rigor of existing standards
  10. 10. CCSS Themes • College and Career Readiness (CCR) • 21st Century Learning • Learning and Innovation Skills • Life and Career Skills • Information Media and Technology Skills • 4-Cs— • Critical Thinking • Communication • Collaboration • Creativity
  11. 11. Are the CCSS for ELA Similar to our Current Standards? • Existing ELA: Four Categories Called Domains • Reading • Writing • Listening and Speaking • Written and Oral English-Language Conventions • CCSS ELA: Four Categories Called Strands • Reading • Writing • Speaking and Listening • Language http://www.scoe.net/castandards/
  12. 12. Literacy Across the Content Areas • Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects are embedded in the Reading and Writing Standards at each Grade Level, K-5. • Grades 6-8, 9-10, and 11-12, Include Reading Standards for Science and Technical Subjects, and Writing Standards for History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects.
  13. 13. Are the CCSS for Math Similar to our Current Standards? • Shift in Grade Level for some Skills • Organization is Different • Grade Level Standards K-8 • Set of Standards for Algebra 1 • Conceptual Cluster Standards for 9-12 • Two Options for 8th Grade • Algebra 1 • Option for those Not Ready for Algebra http://www.scoe.net/castandards/
  14. 14. ASSESSMENT SYSTEMS
  15. 15. How Did We Get Here? Five Assessment Consortia • Race-to-the-Top Regular Assessment Consortia  Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC)  SMARTER Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) • GSEG Alternate Assessment Consortia  Dynamic Learning Maps (DLM)  National Center and State Collaborative (NCSC) • ELP Assessment Consortium  ASSETS: Assessment Services Supporting ELs through Technology Systems
  16. 16. SBAC Assessment System Format • Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) • Computer Based Testing (CBT) • Paper and Pencil • Accessibility and Accommodations Guidelines Item Types • Selected Response • Constructed Response • Short • Extended • Performance Tasks • Technology Based Items
  17. 17. The SBAC Assessment System English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3 – 8 and High School Last 12 weeks of year* DIGITAL CLEARINGHOUSE of formative tools, processes and exemplars; released items and tasks; model curriculum units; educator training; professional development tools and resources; an interactive reporting system; scorer training modules; and teacher collaboration tools. INTERIM ASSESSMENT Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks INTERIM ASSESSMENT Computer Adaptive Assessment and Performance Tasks Scope, sequence, number, and timing of interim assessments locally determined PERFORMANCE TASKS • Reading • Writing • Math COMPUTER ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENT Re-take option Optional Interim assessment system — no stakes Summative assessment for accountability * Time windows may be adjusted based on results from the research agenda and final implementation decisions. Developed by The Center for K–12 Assessment & Performance Management at ETS, version 4, July 2011. For detailed information on PARCC, go to http://PARCConline.org.
  18. 18. NCSC Overview (Not Yet Officially Adopted in CA) • Building consensus on what College and Career Ready means for students who participate in Alternative Assessment • Building solid content foundations with articulated educational logic (Learning Maps; Learning Progressions and CCSS Dual Alignment); and Evidence Centered Design • Computer-based delivery of assessments • Resources and professional development supports to educators • Assistive Technology and Augmentative and Alternative Communication (AT/AAC)
  19. 19. The NCSC Alternate Assessment System* English Language Arts and Mathematics, Grades 3–8 and High School DIGITAL LIBRARY of curriculum, instruction, and classroom assessment resources; online professional development modules and support materials for state-level educator Communities of Practice to support teachers with the resources they need to improve student outcomes; guidelines for IEP teams to use in student participation decision making; training modules for assessment administration and interpretation of results; online assessment delivery, administration, and reporting. END-OF-YEAR ASSESSMENT COMMUNITIES OF PRACTICE established in each state to support teacher training and use of the curriculum, instruction, and assessment resources. Resources will be available for use in all schools and districts, as locally determined. Curriculum, instruction, and formative assessment resources for classroom use Interim progress monitoring tools Summative assessment for accountability * Alternate assessment systems are those developed for students with the most significant cognitive disabilities and are based on alternate achievement standards.
  20. 20. LEARNING MAPS VERSUS LEARNING PROGRESSIONS
  21. 21. Progressions • Vertical progression toward learning target • Sequenced building blocks • Research-based • Linked to high-quality assessments
  22. 22. Uses percentages to make straightforward comparisons Uses the symbols =, < and > to order numbers and make comparisons Uses decimal notation to two places Uses place value to distinguish and order whole numbers Use numbers to decide which is bigger, smaller, same size Masters, G. & Forster, M. (1997). Developmental Assessment. Victoria, AU: The Australian Council for Education Research Ltd.
  23. 23. Maps Allow for the Integration of Multiple Skills…
  24. 24. Equal quantity Compare two quantities up to ten using models Identify more number of Use perceptual subitizing Identify more than one Identify different number of Identify same number of Identify fewer number of Identify one Compare sets Explain set Recognize wholeness Recognize same Recognize different Compare objects Imitate Create a model of quantity
  25. 25. Learning Progressions vs. Learning Maps Centralizes notion of “superhighway” Delineates multiple pathways
  26. 26. RESOURCES AND SUPPORT MATERIALS
  27. 27. CCSS Spirals • Anchor Standards—Progress Through Multiple Grade Levels • Skills Build Upon Prior Grade Levels • http://ctaipd.ning.com/page/deeper-dive-into-the-common-core- state-standards-and-assessments• http://api.ning.com/files/E12ZO5fIjR2btsFSJ3bENitBMEuc6Jox o42FFoDTrL5unURlrZNVm*xAJVloUEq6kTr8aAv45N2z43DKR 0lLFKnsLSRZXnX0/A28SpiralsforGTCWorkshop.pdf
  28. 28. Reading Standards for Literacy in Science and Technical Subjects (RST): Standard 2 RST.2 Anchor Standard: Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas. = RST.2.11-12 Grade 11-12 students Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; summarize complex concepts, processes, or information presented in a text by paraphrasing them in simpler but still accurate terms. + RST.2.9-10 Grade 9-10 students Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; trace the text’s explanation or depiction of a complex process, phenomenon, or concept; provide an accurate summary of the text. + RST.2.6-8 Grade 8 students Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; provide an accurate summary of the text distinct from prior + knowledge or opinions.
  29. 29. Reading Standards for Literacy in Science and Technical Subjects (RST): Standard 1 RST.1 Anchor Standard: Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text. = RST.1.11-12 Grade 11-12 students Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and + technical texts, attending to important distinctions the author makes and to any gaps or inconsistencies in the account. RST.1.9-10 Grade 9-10 students Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and + technical texts, attending to the precise details of explanations or descriptions. RST.1.6-8 Grade 8 students Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and + technical texts.
  30. 30. Key Ideas and Details: Standard 1 6, [7], 8 Cite [several pieces of] textual evidence that most strongly support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text. 4, [5] [Quote accurately and] refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text. 1, [2], 3 Ask and answer questions [such as who, what, where, when, why and how to demonstrate understanding] about key details in a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers. K With prompting and support, ask and answer questions about key details in a text. Grade—Standard CCR Anchor Standard 1: Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.
  31. 31. National Center and State Collaborative • Instructional Resources • Aligned to the CCSS • Curriculum Resources • Classroom Solutions • https://wiki.ncscpartners.org/mediawiki/index.php/ Main_Page
  32. 32. Instructional Resources • Curriculum Resource Guide • Instructional Units • Graduated Understandings • Instructional Resource Guide • Scripted Systematic Instruction
  33. 33. Curriculum Resources • Explain How to Teach Students Including those with Significant Disabilities • Based on Universal Design for Learning Strategies • Provide Examples
  34. 34. Classroom Solutions • Instructional Units • UDL Strategies • Multiple Means of Engagement, Representation and Expression • General Education Lessons • Designed to be Accessible to Students with Significant Cognitive Disabilities • Promote Inclusive and Collaborative Strategies
  35. 35. Progress Indicator: E.NO.1a Core Content Connectors: K showing mastery of the prerequisite core skills of cardinality, constancy, and 1:1 correspondence CCSS Domain/Cluster Counting and Cardinality K.NO.1a1 Rote count up to 10 K CC Know number names and the count sequence. Counting and Cardinality K.NO.1a2 Rote count up to 31 K CC Know number names and the count sequence. K.NO.1a3 Rote count up to Counting and Cardinality 100 K CC Know number names and the count sequence. K.NO.1a4 Count up to 10 Counting and Cardinality objects in a line, rectangle, or K CC Count to tell the number of array objects. Common Core State Standard K.CC.1 Count to 100 by ones and by tens. K.CC.1 Count to 100 by ones and by tens. K.CC.1 Count to 100 by ones and by tens. K.CC.4 Understand the relationship between numbers and quantities; connect counting to cardinality. a) When counting objects, say the number names in the standard order, pairing each object with one and only one number name and each number name with tone and only one object. K.CC.5 Count to answer “how many?” questions about as many as 20 things arranged in a line, a rectangular array, or a circle, or as many as 10 things in a scattered configuration; given a number from 1-20, count out that many objects. Progress Indicator: E.NO.1b developing an understanding of number and principles of quantity (e.g., hold up 5 fingers at once to show 5, locate things in 2s without counting; using number words to indicate small exact numbers or relative change in quantity - more, small) Core Content Connectors: K CCSS Domain/Cluster Common Core State Standard K.NO.1b1 Match the numeral Counting and Cardinality K.CC.4 Understand the relationship between numbers and quantities; connect counting to the number of objects in a K CC Count to tell the number of to cardinality. a) When counting objects, say the number names in the standard order, pairing set objects. each object with one and only one number name and each number name with tone and only one object. K.CC.5 Count to answer “how many?” questions about as many as 20 things arranged in a line, a rectangular array, or a circle, or as many as 10 things in a scattered configuration; given a number from 1-20, count out that many objects. K.NO.1b2 Identify the set that Counting and Cardinality K.CC.4 Understand the relationship between numbers and quantities; connect counting has more K CC Count to tell the number of to cardinality. a) Understand that the last number name said tells the number of objects counted. objects. The number of objects is the same regardless of their arrangement or the order in which they were counted.
  36. 36. College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading Key Ideas and Details 1. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text. 2. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas. 3. Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over the course of a text. Reading Standards for Literature Grade 3 students: 1. Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers. Grade 4 students: 1. Refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text. Grade 5 students: 1. Quote accurately from a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text. CCCs 3.RL.h1 Answer questions related to the relationship between characters , setting, events, or conflicts (e.g., characters and events, characters and conflicts, setting and conflicts). CCCs 4.RL.i1 Refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly. CCCs 5.RL.b1 Refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly. 3.RL.i2 Answer questions (literal and inferential) and refer to text to support your answer. 4.RL.i2 Refer to details and examples in a text when drawing basic inferences about a story, poem, or drama. 5.RL.b2 Refer to specific text evidence to support inferences, interpretations, or conclusions. 3.RL.i3 Support inferences, opinions, and conclusions using evidence from the text including illustrations. 4.RL.k1 Use details and examples in a text when explaining the author’s purpose (e.g., what did the author use to scare you, surprise you?).
  37. 37. Sample Script (Model, Lead, Test)
  38. 38. What is included in IR Guide? • Overview of Systematic Instruction • Importance of Finding a Response Mode • Explanation of Instructional Strategies and “how to” • Provides sample script for math and ELA skill for each • • • • • instructional strategy Troubleshooting Q&A Constant Time Delay (CTD) System of Least Prompts (LIP) Model, Lead, Test Example/Non-example Training
  39. 39. Instructional Resource Guide
  40. 40. Career College Community Curriculum Common Core Standards Learning Progressions Core Content Connectors Instruction Grade-level Lessons Accommodations Systematic Instruction Assessment Formative, Interim Summative Communicative Competence
  41. 41. HOW CAN WE TIE ALL OF THIS TOGETHER?
  42. 42. What are Other States Doing to Assist Students with Mild, Moderate and Severe Needs? • Universal Design for Learning (UDL) • Core Content Connectors • Content Modules • Curriculum Resource Guides • Instructional Resource Guides • LASSIS • MASSIS
  43. 43. UDL Strategies for Instruction •Strategies and lessons are taken from the general education curriculum. •Principles of UDL are applied:    Multiple Means of Engagement give learners various ways of acquiring information and knowledge. Multiple Means of Representation give learners options for expressive skills and fluency. Multiple Means of Expression provide learners alternatives for demonstrating what they know and provide options for recruiting interest, sustaining effort, and self regulation.
  44. 44. UDL Strategies (cont.) • All strategies/lessons are modified and or adapted for Emerging Readers and Emerging Communicators: Additional Considerations for Emerging Readers and Communicators  Multiple Means of Engagement: Show the end first; present the concrete example of the graph; with the end in mind, have students at multiple levels solve in multiple ways; count or solve using a calculator, graph paper, 2 and 3 dimensional manipulative materials  Multiple Representation: 2 dimensional paper; 3 dimensional objects; etc.  Multiple Means of Expression: Picture problem choices: present 2 choices of possible correct responses and include words or pictures, tactile representations
  45. 45. Universal Design for Learning • UDL is a Set of Principles that Provides All Students Equal Opportunities to Learn • Recognition Networks: The “What” of Learning • Strategic Networks: The “How” of Learning • Affective Networks: The “Why” of Learning
  46. 46. Depth of Knowledge • Level 1 = Recall & Reproductions • Specific Facts, Definitions, Routine Procedures • Level 2 = Skills & Concepts • Applying Skills and Concepts, Relationships, Main Ideas • Level 3 = Strategic Reasoning • Reasoning and Planning in Order to Respond • Level 4 = Extended Reasoning • Complex Planning and Thinking—Usually Over a Period of Time
  47. 47. Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Level 1—Recall and Reproduction Teacher Student • Directs • Responds • Shows • Remembers • Questions • Memorizes • Demonstrates • Explains • Compares • Restates • Examines • Interprets • Tells • Recognizes • Evaluates • Translates
  48. 48. Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Level 2—Skills and Concepts Teacher Student • Shows • Solves Problems • Observes • Calculates • Facilitates • Completes • Questions • Constructs • Organizes • Demonstrates • Evaluates • Compiles
  49. 49. Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Level 3—Strategic Reasoning Teacher Student • Probes • Discusses • Clarifies • Debates • Guides • Examines • Organizes • Judges • Dissects • Justifies • Questons • Uncovers • Accepts • Disputes • Acts a Resource • Decides
  50. 50. Depth of Knowledge (DOK) Level 4—Extended Reasoning Teacher Student • Facilitates • Designs • Reflects • Takes Risks • Extends • Proposes • Analyzes • Formulates • Evaluates • Plans • Creates • Modifies
  51. 51. Depth of Knowledge--Activities • Level 1 = Recall & Reproductions • Concept Map, Timeline, Keywords, Chart, Recite Facts, Cut Out, Draw, Cartoon Strip, Oral Report, Outline, Paraphrase, Retell • Level 2 = Skills & Concepts • Classify a Series of Steps, Construct a Model—Demonstrate How it Works, Perform a Play, Make a Game or Puzzle About the Area of Study, Explain the Meaning of a Concept, Explain Relationship Among a Number of Concepts, Multi-Step Calculations • Level 3 = Strategic Reasoning • Venn Diagram to Show how Two Topics are the Same and Different, Design a Questionnaire, Flow Chart to Show Stages, Conduct an Investigation, Debate, Persuasive Speech, Letter with Point of View, Research and Report on the “Why” of an Issue or Topic • Level 4 = Extended Reasoning • Formulate and Test Hypotheses, Perspective Taking and Collaboration, Persuasive Writing Tasks, Devise a Way To…, Sell and Idea, Write a Jingle to Sell an Idea, Develop a Menu with a Variety of Healthy Foods
  52. 52. The Least Dangerous Assumption We assume that students with the most significant cognitive disabilities are competent and able to learn, and we support increased educational opportunities in a range of learning environments. 52
  53. 53. DEVELOPING IEP GOALS BASED ON THE CCSS
  54. 54. Developing Goals Based on the CCSS
  55. 55. Developing Instructionally Appropriate IEPs? • An Instructionally Appropriate IEP describes a process in which the IEP team has incorporated state content standards in its development • Specific accommodations and modifications addressing student’s needs to access the general education instructional program are included in the Instructionally Appropriate IEP for student’s present grade-level and course content requirements.
  56. 56. Current Practice • IEP Team Identifies Unique Needs • Unique Needs Are Often Discussed Without Reference to Grade-Level Standards, Curriculum and Instruction • This Often Results in Two Parallel Educational and/or Instructional Programs for Students with IEPs • General Education and • Special Education Or, • Functional and • Academic
  57. 57. Best Practice • Identify Student’s Unique Needs in Relation to the CCSS • Develop Present Levels Based on Unique Needs and CCSS • Identify the Gap Between PLOP and Grade-Level CCSS • Develop a Plan to Meet—or Get As Close As Possible to-Grade-Level CCSS • Develop Annual IEP Goals Based on All of the Above
  58. 58. Developing Goals Based on the CCSS • Use Grade-Level Standards • Examine the Essential Content and Skills within that Standard Based on the Student’s Identified Unique Needs • Aim High--Rigor and Fidelity based on • Bloom • Webb’s Depth of Knowledge • Universal Design for Learning • Work Towards Closing Gaps • Grade-Level Access with Supplemental Remediation Only As Needed
  59. 59. Consider All Areas • Environmental Situations • Social Interactions • Behavioral Needs • Prerequisite Skills • Curriculum Resources • Instructional Resources • Instructional Methodologies • Accommodations and/or Modification • Assessment Procedures • Progress Reporting
  60. 60. Access to the General Education Curriculum • An IEP must include “a statement of measurable annual goals, including academic and functional goals, designed to meet the child’s needs that result from the child’s disability to enable the child to be involved in and make progress in the general education curriculum.” (IDEA, 2004, 614(d)(1)(A)(i),)
  61. 61. Developing Goals and Objectives Based on the CCSS and Specially Designed Instruction IEP Goal
  62. 62. Unwrapping the Standards, or Putting the “I” in CCSS • Individualizing Grade-Level Standards • Select the Standard Based on Present Levels of Performance • Assessment • Progress on Last Year’s Goals • Curriculum-Based Assessment • Circle the Verbs and/or Action Words and Terms • Underline the Key Skills • Develop Goals
  63. 63. A Word or Two About Present Levels of Performance • PLOPS are Always Directly Related to the Goal • Always Include a Strength and Weakness • Weakness = Goal • Avoid TMI
  64. 64. Example of PLOP • PLOP: Based on scores on the WJ (list reading or spelling scores) and curriculum-based measures (list Curriculum or supplemental materials used—e.g., work samples from Corrective Reading or Open Court) Frank understands all of his grade-level short vowel CVC words; however, he is easily distracted during class instruction and is not able to convert short vowels to long vowels using the magic “e.” • Goals: By 10-2-14, Frank will be able to convert 20 shortvowel CVC words to long-vowel CVCV words using the magic “e” with 90% accuracy in 4 out of 5 trials. • Discussion
  65. 65. Example of PLOP (continued) • PLOP: Based on scores on the WJ (list reading or spelling scores) and curriculum-based measures (list Curriculum or supplemental materials used—e.g., work samples from Corrective Reading or Open Court) Frank understands all of his grade-level short vowel CVC words; however, he is not able to convert short vowels to long vowels using the magic “e.” • Goals: By 10-2-14, Frank will be able to convert 20 shortvowel CVC words to long-vowel CVCV words using the magic “e” with 90% accuracy in 4 out of 5 trials.
  66. 66. What is the difference between the Traditional and Instructionally Appropriate IEP? Traditional IEP • • Focused on acquiring basic academic, access, and/or functional skills Little relationship to a specific academic area or grade-level expectations Instructionally Appropriate IEP • • Directly tied to the Common Core standards Both the student’s present level of academic achievement and functional performance (PLOP) and the annual IEP goals are aligned with and based on the state’s grade-level standards
  67. 67. What are the benefits of a Instructionally Appropriate IEP? • • • • • • Ties the IEP to the general education curriculum Provides positive directions and goals for intervention Utilizes standards to identify specific content critical to a student's successful progress in the general education curriculum Promotes a single educational system that is inclusive through common language and curriculum for special and general education students Ensures greater consistency across schools and districts Encourages higher expectations for students with disabilities
  68. 68. Does an Instructionally Appropriate IEP imply that the student is on grade-level in that content area? • No, the student may not be on grade-level in that content area. However, they are working toward meeting grade-level expectations and are receiving grade-level content instruction.
  69. 69. Instructionally Appropriate IEP • Developing the Present Level of Academic Achievement and Functional Performance (PLOP) • PLOPs and IEP Goals are Based on CCSS—from Far Below Grade Level to At or Near Grade Level
  70. 70. Step 1: Review the Grade-Level Standards • All members of the IEP team, including parents, should become familiar with the general education grade level standards • Note that IEPs that span two school years may require goals from both grade levels (e.g. 7th grade ELA and 8th grade ELA). • Consider how the student is performing in relation to the gradelevel content standards for the grade in which he or she is currently enrolled. • Ask: • What is the intent of the content standard? • What must the student know and be able to do to meet the content standard?
  71. 71. Step 2: Examine Classroom and Student Data Analyze the student’s performance relative to grade-level Common Core standards on: • Informal class assessments, statewide assessments, real-world performance tasks, criterion-based evaluations, curriculum-based assessments, and work samples. • Identify the grade-level Common Core standards that are • • • • most affected by the student’s disability. Consider whether the data are valid measures of the student’s abilities. Use the data to predict future learning needs. Consider parent and student input. Review previous IEPs and progress monitoring data regarding the student’s performance.
  72. 72. Step 2: Examine Classroom and Student Data • Ask: • What can the IEP team learn from the data about the student’s • • • • • • • • performance on grade-level content standards and skills? Can the assessment data provide useful information for identifying the student’s strengths and needs? What gaps in knowledge and skills does the student have? What can we learn from the way the student responded to previous accommodations? Were the previous interventions successful? Are there skills from previous grade levels that the student has not learned that are crucial to acquiring the grade-level standard? Which are most important to supporting progress? Are there authentic, real-world tasks that demonstrate evidence of student learning? Are there data on student reflection and self-assessment? Is anyone collecting multiple measures? If so, who?
  73. 73. Step 3: Writing the PLOP • Describe individual strengths and needs of the student in • • • • relation to accessing the general curriculum. Include data from evaluations, classroom and state assessments, observations, information from parents and students, and other resources (examples listed above). Identify the skills and knowledge that a student needs to achieve to meet academic grade-level content standards. Identified needs will be used to develop annual IEP goals. Identify the student’s Response Mode (e.g., Verbal, Writing, Technology, Visuals, PECS,Pointing, Eye Gaze, etc.)
  74. 74. Step 3: Writing the PLOP • Ask: • What are the grade-level content standards? • What is the student’s performance in relation to grade-level standards? • What are the student’s strengths in terms of accessing and mastering the general curriculum? Include • • • • • • • • • sources of this information. What are this student’s areas of need in accessing and mastering the general curriculum? Include sources of this information. What academic skills and behaviors is the student able/unable to perform? What functional skills and behaviors is the student able/unable to perform? Do functional, organizational, or social skills issues affect the student’s involvement and progress in the general curriculum? What strategies, accommodations, and/or interventions have been successful in helping the student make progress in the general curriculum? How does the identified disability affect involvement and progress in the general curriculum? What are the parental concerns? What are the student’s interests, preferences, and goals? Include postsecondary aspirations if ageappropriate. Is the student progressing at a rate to achieve grade-level proficiency within the year?
  75. 75. PLOP Quick Check • Is the information educationally valuable and written in a user-friendly fashion? • Does the baseline data represent the student’s needs in relationship to the general education curriculum? • Would any teacher know where to begin instruction based on the information provided in the PLOP?
  76. 76. Instructionally Appropriate Individualized Education Program (IEP): Developing Instructionally-Appropriate Measurable Annual Goals Ask: What are the student’s needs as identified in the present level of performance? What skills does the student require to master the content of the curriculum? What can the student reasonably be expected to accomplish in one school year?
  77. 77. Components of Annual Goals Student Who Timeframe Length of Time Conditions Under What Conditions Behavior Will Do What Criterion To What Level or Degree
  78. 78. Components of Annual Goals • Ask: • Does the goal have a specific time frame? • Are the conditions for meeting the goal addressed? • How will you measure the outcome of the goal? • Are the goals written in terms that parents and teachers can understand? • Do the goals support participation and progress in the general education curriculum? • Do the annual goals support postsecondary goals?
  79. 79. IEP GOAL DEVELOPMENT AND INSTRUCTIONAL ALIGNMENT
  80. 80. Aligning IEPs to the Common Core State Standards for Students with Moderate and Severe Disabilities (Courtade & Browder, 2011) Speaking and Listening Standard Speaking and Listening IEP Goal • Comprehension and • Comprehension and Collaboration • Engage Effectively in a range of collaborative discussion (one-on-one, in groups, and teacher-led) Collaboration • Frank will use picture communication in group context to acknowledge others’ communication
  81. 81. There’s an App for That…. CCSS App by SCOE
  82. 82. Common Core Standards (by Mastery Connect) CCSS App
  83. 83. IEP Goal Development and Instructional Alignment—Based on CCSS 1. Identify the student’s present level of academic achievement and functional performance. 2. Identify the appropriate grade level standard(s). 3. Unpack the standard. Identify what the student needs to know and be able to do in the simplest terms possible. For example: • • • • Divide the standard into its component parts. Analyze the sub-skills. Determine accommodations and/or modifications needed for the student to successfully reach standard. Determine a plan to monitor progress.
  84. 84. CCSS Goal and Instructional Strategies Alignment Tool • CCSS Standard • Possible Goal Areas • Instructional Strategies • Accommodations/Modifications • Goal Format (Given—Will—Measured By) • Goal
  85. 85. CCSS Goal and Instructional Strategies Framework • Standard • Goal • Goal Format (Given—Will—Measured By) • Mild Moderate Severe
  86. 86. What is the Current Status? • CCSS Goals Statewide Work Group • CA Standards-aligned IEP Project (CSIP) • Tools & Resources for Instruction and Goal Development • Smarter Balanced • Pilot Districts/Sites • Pilot Test Accessibility and Accommodations Guidelines • NCSC • Not Officially Adopted in CA • CDE Hired New Person to Oversee • Advisory Board • Communities of Practice • South—Central—North • Will Expand Across the State • Developing Instructional Strategies/Curricula • More Information Soon
  87. 87. What are the Key Areas to Consider in Making the Transition? • Digital Divide • Curriculum Alignment • CCSS Anchor Standards • Shift from M/M and M/S to • Mild—Moderate—Severe • Collaboration: Gen. Ed. & Spec. Ed. • Universal Design for Learning (UDL) • Staff Development • Is Spec. Ed. Staff Included? • Service Delivery Models • Values and Beliefs
  88. 88. What Happens to the CMA? • CMA—Science for Grades 5, 8 and 10 • Will continue as part of the CMAPP beginning 2013-14 until a successor science assessment aligned to the Next Generation Science Standards is adopted by the State Board of Education • CMA—ELA for Grades 3 – 11 and Math for Grades 3 – 7 and Algebra I and Geometry will be available on a voluntary basis for 2013-14 and 2014-15 to be administered at the Option and Cost of the LEA
  89. 89. When Do We Start Using the SBAC? • SBAC for 2013-14 will Field Tested in Both ELA and Math • Will Include CMA Students • Scores from the SBAC Field Tests will not be reported
  90. 90. What About the CAPA? • The CAPA Continues to be our State Test for students with significant disabilities (one percent) as determined by IEP Teams for the 2013-14 School Year • AB 484 • Requires the Use of the CAPA for Grades 2-11 to continue unless the State Board of Education adopts an Alternative Assessment • ..
  91. 91. How Do We Document the in our IEPs? • At this time, how we document State Testing in our IEPs is • • • • a Local Decision We have yet to receive guidance on this from CDE We expect to receive guidance soon…. Many County Offices of Educations, SELPAs, and Districts are recommending that we remain Status Quo at this time up until we receive guidance in this area Check with your District and/or SELPA before changing the way you document State Testing in IEPs
  92. 92. What About Digital Goal Banks? • There are Many Private Vendors Available • CDE Workgroup • Complete Tool Kit and Resource Bank • Other States Have Their Own Versions • IEP Systems are Working on Them • Professional Organizations are Working on Them • Get Ready for the Tidal Wave
  93. 93. Questions?
  94. 94. Additional Resources • http://www.ocde.us/CommonCoreCA/Pages/default • • • • • • • .aspx http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/smarterbalanced.as p http://www.cde.ca.gov/ta/tg/sa/ab250.asp www.corestandards.org www.commoncore.org/maps http://www.smarterbalanced.org/ http://www.ncscpartners.org/ www.udlcenter.org

×