Reading Alignment Congruence Between the Reading GLEs and the by dk24934

VIEWS: 45 PAGES: 41

									Reading Alignment: Congruence
Between the Reading GLEs and the
High School Reading WASL



     Debbi Hardy           Lesley Klenk, PhD,
     Curriculum Director   Reading Assessment Manager
Objectives for today’s session:

  Understand the structure of the GLEs
  Understand the 3 Cs of alignment
  Understand the relationship between the GLE
   structure, the 3 Cs, and the WASL
  Analyze the WASL data and its implications
   for instruction
  Understand the structure of the practice test
   and the related resources for its use
Grade Level Expectations…
explain what students should know and be able to do


 Each GLE contains:

  A statement of cognitive demand and the essential
   content or process to be learned.

  Evidence of Learning is a bulleted list of student
   demonstrations that provides educators with common
   illustrations of the learning.
Understanding the Reading GLEs

 EALR 1: The student understands and uses different skills and
  strategies to read.
 Component 1.3: Build vocabulary through wide reading.                                WASL
                                                                                      Eligible
  GLE         Grade 9/10                                                               GLE

  1.3.2        Understand and apply content/academic vocabulary critical
              to the meaning of the text, including vocabularies relevant
              to different contexts, cultures, and communities. W
               Integrate new vocabulary from informational/expository text and
  Grade
  Level         literary/narrative text, including text from a variety of cultures and
Expectatio      communities.
    n          Explain the meaning of content-specific vocabulary words.
               Select, from multiple choices, the meaning of a word identified in the text.
               Transfer knowledge of vocabulary learned in content areas to comprehend
Evidence of
                other grade-level informational and literary text.
 Learning
Example of Numbering System
                              Grade Level: X
                                  3.4.2


        EALR 3:                                                    GLE 3.4.2:
The student reads different                                 Evaluate traditional and
 materials for a variety of                                  contemporary literature
         purposes                                             in a variety of genres.
                                  Component 3.4:
                              Read for literary/narrative
                              experience in a variety of
                                       genres.




         Note: The grade level is NOT represented by one of the digits
Establishing Common Language

  Curriculum – defined by the school district based on the
   EALRs and GLEs.

  Instruction – implementation of the defined curriculum.


  Assessment – multiple measures of proficiency of the
   defined curriculum (diagnosis, formative, summative).
Alignment – congruence or match between
curriculum, instruction and assessment



                           Curriculum
                     Defined by the District
                      based on EALRs/GLEs




                            STUDENT
                          ACHIEVEMENT



     Instruction                               Assessment
  Implementation of the                    Multiple measures of
   defined curriculum                       proficiency of the
                                            defined curriculum
Research Finding…

Ability of instruction to overcome initial aptitude
differences was one goal in a study of alignment effect
relative to task difficulty. (Community College students –
understanding main idea.)

Lower aptitude students did not perform as well as higher
aptitude students when test items misaligned from
practice. On the more difficult task, alignment was so
effective that lower aptitude students performed better
under aligned conditions than did higher aptitude students
under misaligned. (What was structured as misaligned
was what one normally sees in the average classroom.)

                                          — The Fahey Study
                                                       1986
Alignment – congruence or match between
curriculum, instruction, and assessment


 Topical alignment


 Deep alignment
Topical Alignment:
   Congruence of the content (knowledge, skill, process, or
    concept) in the curriculum, instruction, and assessment

   Initial level of alignment (Textbook Correlation Analysis)

                               Curriculum
                         Defined by the District
                          based on EALRs/GLEs




                                STUDENT
                              ACHIEVEMENT


         Instruction                               Assessment
      Implementation of the                    Multiple measures of
       defined curriculum                       proficiency of the
                                                defined curriculum
Examples of Reading Content


 Draw Conclusions (skill/strategy)
 Vocabulary (knowledge/concepts)
 Generalize (skill)
 Textbook Preview (process)
 Literary Genres (knowledge)
Alignment – congruence or match between
curriculum, instruction, and assessment

  Topical alignment


  Deep alignment
Deep Alignment


 Congruence of content, context, and cognitive
 demand present in the curriculum, instruction
 and assessment
What do we look for to identify deep
alignment?

 The 3 Cs of deep alignment:

 Content

  Context

  Cognitive demand
Context: refers to the ways in which the
content may be learned and demonstrated

  Instructional conditions – includes supplied
   materials, available resources, and specialized
   vocabulary
  Tasks – student responses and/or activities
   (including format and mathematical situations)
Examples of instructional conditions


 Text with highlighted main ideas
 Printed steps for previewing informational text
 Graphic Organizer used for note taking
 Work with a partner
 List of key vocabulary words
 A passage at the correct reading level
Examples of student tasks


 Summarize the passage, including three main points in
    the summary.
   With the people at your table, identify and discuss
    recurring themes in the three recently read short stories.
   Draw a picture to illustrate the plot of the story.
   Explain your inference and support with evidence from
    the text.
   Provide two examples of personification from the
    selection.
What do we look for to
identify deep alignment?

 The 3 Cs of deep alignment:

 Content

 Context

  Cognitive demand
Cognition Type

 or ―cognitive demand‖ - generally refers to Bloom’s
 taxonomy and reflects a classification of thinking
 rather than a sequential hierarchy.
 (understanding prior to application and analysis)

 Cognitive demand is determined by analyzing the
  context of the lesson.
  (What support is provided and what are the students
  being asked to do?)
Understanding by Design/Bloom’s
Taxonomy/ Marzano’s New
Taxonomy
Six Facets of Under-   Bloom’s Taxonomy -             Marzano’s New
standing by Design     Cognitive Domain               Taxonomy
Explanation            Knowledge                      Retrieval

Interpretation         Comprehension:                 Comprehension
                       interpretation, translation,
                       extrapolation
Application            Application                    Analysis

Perspective            Analysis                       Utilization

Empathy                Synthesis                      Goal setting and
                                                      monitoring
Self-Knowledge         Evaluation                     Self-system thinking
Examples of cognition type:

 Analyze web-based and other resource materials
  for relevance in answering research questions.

 Apply summarization comprehension strategy

 Evaluate an author’s choice of literary genre to
  convey a message.
Activity

  With a partner (or two), walk through the
   Grade 9/10 GLEs scanning for the cognitive
   demand.

  Draw a conclusion regarding the expectation
   for high school students.
What do we look for to
identify deep alignment?

 The 3 Cs of deep alignment:

 Content

 Context

 Cognitive demand
Identifying the 3 Cs
Reading - Grade 9/10
2.2.3    Analyze story elements.
 Interpret the interdependence and interaction of characters, theme,
  setting, conflict, and resolution (e.g., in a short story, novel, epic
  poem).
 Compare/contrast how recurring themes are treated by diverse
  authors or in different genres.
 Select, from multiple choices, a word or sentence that best
  describes a specific story element (e.g., character, conflict,
  resolution).
Identifying the 3 Cs
Reading - Grade 9/10
2.4.2 Analyze author’s purpose and evaluate how
  an author’s style of writing influences different
  audiences.
 Compare and contrast selected authors’ styles of writing to
  achieve a similar purpose.
 Draw conclusions about style, tone, mood, meaning of
  prose, poetry, and/or drama based on the author’s word
  choice and use of figurative language.
 Explain why an author uses particular language to create an
  intended effect (e.g., foreign words…)
 Judge the effectiveness of the author’s use of language to
  create an intended effect.
Analysis Activity

You will need:
The GLE booklet and
Platero and I, by Juan Ramon Jimenez

Tasks:
 Refer back to GLE 2.4.2. Reread the GLE and bullets 2
  and 3.
 Turn to page 142 and read Responding to Platero and I.
 Discuss the ways you might enrich the context of the
  lesson (instructional conditions and/or the task/activity)
  keeping in mind the importance of alignment.
Time to wake up and stretch your legs.
  2005 WASL Results (compared to 2004)


             R       M       W       S
Grade 4     +4.8    +0.7    +1.7

Grade 5                             +7.3

Grade 7     +8.2    +4.1    +2.9
Grade 8                              -3.2

Grade 10    +7.8    +3.1    -0.7    +3.3
              Grades 4, 7, and 10 Reading
        Percent of Students at Each Level in 2005


Grade
        Did not meet standard                 Met standard                      Exceeded standard



   4          5.2           13.9                        42.8                               35.5



   7       7.2            21.6                   29.7                              38.3



  10                9.0      11.8               27.9                                43.7




                             Percent of Students at Each Level
              * Percentages do not total 100 as chart does not include untested students
                   Grade 10 Reading
       Movement Across Achievement Levels

             Did not meet standard             Met standard
                                                                         Exceeded standard




1999            13.7%           23.1%            18.1%                  33.4%




                8,636            14,562            11,410                 21,055




2005                        8.0% 11.8%                27.9%                             43.7%



                    7,157          9,344            22,126                        34,714

                        Percent of Students at Each Level
           * Percentages do not total 100 as chart does not include untested students
                            Grade 10 Reading
                Percent of Students at Each Level


                 Did not meet standard           Met standard   Exceeded standard

1999              13.7            23.1              18.1            33.4

2000                11.7              19.6           22.1               37.7

2001                 10.9             18.9        14.5                47.9

2002               13.9               20.0         15.2               44.0

2003                 13.3             19.1         17.3               42.7

2004                     12.0         17.1        13.9                 50.8

2005                            9.0     11.8             27.9                   43.7

                         N=7,157       N=9,344      N=22,126                  N=34,714


  Percentages do not total 100 as chart does not include untested students
                                                  Grade 10 Reading



                Percent of Students Meeting Standard from 1999 to 2005 by Ethnicity
100.0

 90.0
                      1999             2000               2001     2002            2003          2004         2005

 80.0                                               77.7                                                                  75.9

 70.0

 60.0                     55.0
                                                                            52.3                     51.7
 50.0

 40.0

 30.0

 20.0

 10.0

  0.0
        American Indian          Asian/Pacific Islander           Black                   Hispanic                White



        1114 of 2158             4900 of 6518                2097 of 4216          3921 of 8128             43,868 of 59,231
                                                                 Grade 10 Reading
                                     Percent of Students Meeting Standards in Three Subjects
                                                (Reading, Mathematics and Writing)
                      100.0


                       90.0


                       80.0                  2001                2002            2003                 2004           2005
                       70.0
Percent of Students




                       60.0


                       50.0
                                                   43.6   44.3
                                                                                               40.2                                41.1
                                            38.9                                                                            38.8
                       40.0                                                             36.2
                                     34.7                                                                            33.9
                              29.2                                                                       30.2 30.6
                       30.0                                                      27.4
                                                                          22.7
                                                                   19.8
                       20.0


                       10.0


                        0.0
                                       Grade 4                              Grade 7                            Grade 10
Reading WASL Practice Tests

 All passages and items have been used
 on operational tests.

 Look like a WASL.
                      • Built for grades 4, 7 & High
                        School.

                      • Come with a look up table
                        to check the cut score to
                        scale score conversion.
Introduction to the 2005
High School Reading WASL
Practice Test
A Look at the
Practice Test
•   How many passages are on the Reading WASL?

•   What kind of passages are on the Reading WASL?

•   How many constructed response items are on the
    Reading WASL?

•   What kind of constructed response items are on the
    Reading WASL?

•   How many items are on the Reading WASL?
                                         GRADES 3, 4, AND 5 TARGETS
                 Literary Targets                                         Informational Targets
LC01 Demonstrate understanding of theme or             IC11 Demonstrate understanding of major ideas and
message and supporting details                         supporting details
(Reading GLE 2.1.3)                                    (Reading GLE 2.1.3)
LC02 Summarize with evidence from the reading          IC12 Summarize with evidence from the reading (Reading
(Reading GLE 2.1.7)                                    GLE 2.1.7)
LC03 Make inferences or predictions based on the       IC13 Make inferences or predictions based on the reading
reading (Reading GLE 2.1.5)                            (Reading GLE 2.1.5)
LC04 Interpret vocabulary critical to the meaning of   IC14 Interpret vocabulary critical to the meaning of the text
the text (Reading GLE 1.3.2)                           (Reading GLE 1.3.2)
LC05 Order steps, sequence, and/or events from         IC15 Order steps, sequence, and/or process from the
the reading (Reading GLE 2.2.1)                        reading (Reading GLE 2.2.1)
LA06 Demonstrate understanding of literary             IA16 Demonstrate understanding of text features (titles,
elements (genres; story elements such as plot,         headings, and other information divisions, table of contents,
character, setting; stylistic devices;                 captions) and graphic features
problem/resolution) and graphic                        (Reading GLE 2.2.2)
elements/illustrations
(Reading GLEs 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.3.3)
LA07 Compare and contrast elements of text             IA17 Compare and contrast information presented in text
(Reading GLE 2.3.1, 2.4.5, 2.4.6)                      (Reading GLE 2.3.1, 2.4.5, 2.4.6)
LA08 Make connections (cause and effect) within        IA18 Make connections (cause and effect) within a text
a text (Reading GLE 2.3.1)                             (Reading GLE 2.3.1)
LA09 Analyze author's purpose and evaluate             IA19 Analyze author's purpose (including distinguishing
effectiveness for different audiences                  between fact and opinion) and evaluate effectiveness for
(Reading GLE 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 2.4.4)                      different audiences
                                                       (Reading GLE 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 2.4.4)
LA10 Extend information beyond text—apply              IA20 Extend information beyond text—apply information,
information, give a response to reading, express       give a response to reading, express insight gained from
insight gained from reading                            reading (Reading GLE 2.4.1, 2.4.5)
(Reading GLE 2.4.1, 2.4.5)
                                GRADES 6, 7, 8, AND HIGH SCHOOL TARGETS
                  Literary Targets                                       Informational Targets
LC01 Demonstrate understanding of theme or             IC11 Demonstrate understanding of major ideas and
message and supporting details                         supporting details (Reading GLE 2.1.3)
(Reading GLE 2.1.3)
LC02 Summarize with evidence from the reading          IC12 Summarize with evidence from the reading
(Reading GLE 2.1.7)                                    (Reading GLE 2.1.7)
LC03 Make inferences or predictions based on           IC13 Make inferences or predictions based on the
the reading (Reading GLE 2.1.5)                        reading (Reading GLE 2.1.5)
LC04 Interpret vocabulary critical to the meaning      IC14 Interpret vocabulary critical to the meaning of the
of the text (Reading GLE 1.3.2)                        text (Reading GLE 1.3.2)
LA05 Demonstrate understanding of literary             IA15 Demonstrate understanding of text features (titles,
elements (genres; story elements such as plot,         headings and other information divisions, table of
character, setting; stylistic devices) and graphic     contents, indexes, glossaries, prefaces, appendices,
elements/illustrations                                 captions) and graphic features
(Reading GLEs 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.3.3)                     (Reading GLE 2.2.2)
LA06 Compare and contrast elements of text             IA16 Compare and contrast information presented in
(Reading GLEs 2.3.1, 2.4.6)                            texts (Reading GLEs 2.3.1, 2.4.6)
LA07 Make connections (cause and effect) within        IA17 Make connections (cause and effect) within a text
a text (Reading GLE 2.3.1)                             (Reading GLE 2.3.1)
LT08 Analyze author’s purpose and evaluate             IT18 Analyze author’s purpose (including distinguishing
effectiveness for different audiences (includes        between fact and opinion) and evaluate effectiveness
fact/opinion, author’s point of view, tone, and use    for different audiences (Reading GLEs 2.4.2, 2.4.3,
of persuasive devices)                                 2.4.4)
(Reading GLEs 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 2.4.4)
LT09 Evaluate reasoning and ideas/themes related to    IT19 Evaluate reasoning and ideas/themes related to the text
the text (Reading GLEs 2.4.1, 2.4.5)                   (Reading GLE 2.4.1, 2.4.5)
LT10 Extend information beyond text (make              IT20 Extend information beyond text (make generalizations
generalizations beyond the text to a broader idea or   beyond the text to a broader idea or concept, or apply
concept, or apply information to other texts or        information to other texts or situations, or give a response to
situations, or give a response to a reading)           a reading)
Reading Target/GLE Comparison-
Literary
    Strand: Literary Comprehension
    LC01/GLE 2.1.3                      M, S
    LC02/GLE 2.1.7                      M, S
    LC03/GLE 2.1.5                      M, S
    LC04/GLE 1.3.2                      M

    Strand: Literary Analysis
    LA05/GLE 2.2.2, 2.2.3, 2.3.3 M, S, E
    LA06/GLE 2.3.1, 2.4.6                M, S, E
    LA07/GLE 2.3.1                       M, S, E

    Strand: Literary Thinking Critically
    LT08/GLE 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 2.4.4        M, S, E
    LT09/GLE 2.4.1, 2.4.5               M, S, E
    LT10/GLE 2.4.1, 2.4.5               M, S, E
Reading Target/GLE Comparison-
Informational
  Strand: Informational Comprehension
  IC11/GLE 2.1.3                   M, S
  IC12/GLE 2.1.7                   M, S
  IC13/GLE 2.1.5                   M, S
  IC14/GLE 1.3.2                   M

  Strand: Informational Analysis
  IA15/GLE 2.2.2                     M, S, E
  IA16/GLE 2.3.1, 2.4.6              M, S, E
  IA17/GLE 2.3.1                     M, S, E

  Strand: Informational Thinking Critically
  IT18/GLE 2.4.2, 2.4.3, 2.4.4       M, S, E
  IT19/GLE 2.4.1, 2.4.5              M, S, E
  IT20/GLE 2.4.1, 2.4.5              M, S, E
Contact Information

 Debbi Hardy                    Lesley Klenk
 Curriculum Director            Reading Assessment Manager
 360-725-6417                   360-725-6330
 dhardy@ospi.wednet.edu         lklenk@ospi.wednet.edu

 Sue Geiger
 K-12 Reading Administrator
 360-725-6064
 sgeiger@ospi.wednet.edu


                www.k12.wa.us

								
To top