Nintendo Video Game

Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 1 of 10 Introduction to the Colorado Academic Standards Crosswalk Documents The Colorado Department of Education (CDE) is working with stak eholders from across the revised Colorado Academic Standards (2009) . This process includes four broad phases: awareness, transition, implementation, an d transformation. Awareness involves based on the revised standards; implementation involves adjusting instructional practices to the revised standards; and transformation invo lves innovation in teaching and learning based on the revised standards. support tool for transitioning to the revise d standards: standards crosswalk documents. These documents are designed as working t ools to compare the previous Model Content Standards to the revised Colorado Academic Standards. Content experts from the field advised the department on ho w best to create meaningful comparison documents that would assist educators in the transition to the revised Academic Standards. The design of and analysis within the crosswalks was acco mplished through a partnership with educators field. Each content area used an appropriate re ferent for the crosswalk based on content specific factors, such as th used differed across content areas, the inte nt of these documents is the same. The crosswalks are meant to be working tools to support the initial process of curriculum Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 2 of 10 Notable Changes Across All Standards The standards revision process brought a gr eater degree of alignment in design and structure of the all of Colorado’s academic st andards. For all content areas, a comparison backward design process that began with the end in mind by asking the question, “What do we want our students to know and be able to do in each content area when they graduate from high school?” Grade level expectations (GLE): standards articulated grade-b y-grade preschool through 8 grade. High school, except in the reading, writing, and co mmunicating standard, is organized by standard within the content areas to allow districts the freedom to develop a course structure that is best-suited to their student population. Evidence outcomes (EO): New to the revised standards are evidence outcomes that explicitly call out how a student demonstrates the capacity to fulfill the grade- level expectations at the mastery level. These evidence outc omes also integrate academic content and skills that demonstrate what students should know and be able to do as they progress toward a prepared graduate. content are 21 secondary and workforce options by providing opportunities for students to critically think about the content they are studying, show its relevance and application, and how the content relates to the bigger pict ure of that content field. These 21 teaching and learning. While there is a section dedicated to 21 century skills on the standards template, it is important to note integrated throughout the standards. While these changes are common across all content areas, different content areas underwent different degrees of ea crosswalk takes differs. Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 3 of 10 Purpose of the Crosswalk Documents The purpose of these docume nts is to allow for an “at a glance” comparison of uses for these documents. For example, dist ricts may use the crosswalks to assist in curriculum alignment and to assist in planning for transitioning to the revised standards. While there are many uses, it’s important to keep in mind what the crosswalk can do and cannot do. What the Crosswalks Do The standards crosswalk documents are me ant to provide educators, parents, community members, vendors, and Colorado citizens with a tool that illustrates key changes the degree of change a standards based curric ulum would need to undergo based on the line by line delineation of changes. Vendors will be able to use the documents to align instructional materials and resources to th e revised standards. Parents, community members, and Colorado citizens as a whole wi ll be able to note the significant content changes in the newly adopted Ac ademic Standards that reflec t fewer, higher, and clearer expectations in all standards for all students. What the Crosswalks Do Not Do The organization and intent of document s have affordances and limitations. The crosswalks allow for only a comparison of content of the revised standards to the previous standards. To assist in th is level of comparison, only two components of the revised standards were used: grade level expectat ions and evidence ou tcomes. Science has included the nature of the discipline portion in its crosswalk, however. The highlighted lines on the standards template below show what part of the revised standards are being Content Area: Standard Prepared Graduates: High School and Grade Level Expectations Concepts and skills students master: Evidence Outcomes Century Skills and Readiness Competencies Students can: Inquiry Questions: Relevance and Application: Nature of the Discipline: Thus the crosswalks do not repr revised standards is the co nnection of content to 21 century skills and post-secondary and workforce readiness. As such, the crosswal ks do not unpack standards to support 21 century teaching and learning nor do they indicate depth of knowledge. Grade level expectations and evidence outc omes do not comprise the enti component of the standards. Further support for unpacki ng standards to bring the standards into the classroom will be forthcoming from CDE. Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 4 of 10 General Format of the Crosswalks The crosswalks for each conten t area use a similar format. Standard Grade Grade Level Expectations Evidence Outcomes Referent Curriculum Implications Standard and expectations evidence outcomes . referent indicates what the particular content area used as a point of comparison for the crosswalk. For example, the arts used a Suggested Grade Level Expectations document whereas reading, writing, and communicating used the CSAP assessment frameworks. Rationale for each content area re ferent is included in the content specific District curriculum notes and implications allow the crosswalk to become a working document. Just as the crosswalk working gr oups used a common referent for comparison, m guides to cross reference the revised standards. The implications portion of the crosswalk allow users to consider the impact of changed content for districts and schools, such as revising curriculum or professional development for teachers. Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 5 of 10 Content Specific Crosswalk Information Reflecting the differentiation in content ar eas, the existence of auxiliary documents (such as assessment frameworks or suggested gr ade level expectations), approaches to the crosswalk documents were differentiated. The description s of the crosswalk development processes and tools that follo w will explain the unique features of each content area In 2000 documents for all arts content areas (visual arts, drama an and dance) were released. The arts working serve as the best reference to use as a comp arison document for creating the crosswalk The working group for arts crosswalks consis ted of arts coordinators and practitioners representing members from the standards revisi on team and other arts leaders. This cross section ensured an accurate and objective comp arison. Each of the ev idence outcomes from the revised standards was code d to indicate the degree of academic standards to the previous model content standards. The revised standards articulate expectations by grade level for grad es P-8 and by standard for high school. Each expectation was coded according to the degree of similarity with the previous standard objectives in the following manner: Green indicates no significant content di expectation and the Suggested Grade Level Expectations Yellow indicates that there is a change in some of the content in the revised grade level expectation and the Suggested Grade Level Expectations Orange indicates that althou gh the previous standards do not delineate the skill or concept, the skill or concept is commo nly embedded in cla ssroom practice. The primary difference is the level of specificifty in the revised standards format not an expectation of new thinking in the content. Red indicates new content or new thinking at the grade level. The column labeled Referent: Summary of changes fr om the May 2000 Suggested Grade Level Expectations document provides the comparison lang uage directly from the May 2000 Suggested Grade Level Expectations document indicates the rationale for the color in the arison to the left. Preschool evidence outcomes were not coded. The working group decided that such a comparison would not be meanin gful because there were no previous preschool standards to use for comparison. Grade level expectations have not been coded. The reason for this is the change from skill based standards statements in the previous standards and the largely concept based expectations in the revised Academic Standard s. The change in fo rmat and nomenclature did not provide a concise comparison at the grade level expectation level. Comprehensive Health an d Physical Education most significantly the inclusion of comprehensive health, this crosswalk is intended as a tool for districts to conduct an indi vidualized curriculum comparison. The format is the same as all of the other crosswalks and ca n be used in a similar manner. Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 6 of 10 English Language Proficiency On December 10, 2009, the Colorado State Board of Education voted unanimously to adopt the World-Class Instruction Design and Assessment (WIDA) standards as the Colorado English Language Proficiency (ELP ) standards. These standards and related resources can be found at www.wida.us . ELP standards are required by state and federal law. The WIDA standards exceed minimum le gal requirements. Over all, the standards center on the English language needed and us ed by English Language Learners (ELLs) to succeed in school They guide all educators who teach EL Ls and help students’ access grade level academic content while learning English. The WIDA ELP Standards for Pre Ki ndergarten through Grade 12 are: ELLs communicate for Social Instructional purposes within the The State Board of Education requested that the WIDA standards be aligned to the new Colorado Academic Standards. The work of creating Colorado specific WIDA Model Performance Indicators is in progress and updates on this important work will be provided. Please note that Colorado has not joined the WIDA consortium, a decision concerning membership in the WIDA consortium will be made after input from the Assessment Stakeholders as part of the process of developing a state assessment system. Colorado Department of Education (CDE) has a licensure agreement to use WIDA standards and make them available to the pub lic through an electronic copy on the CDE website. The WIDA English Language Prof iciency Standards, 2007 Edition, preschool through Grade 12 (“WIDA ELP Standards”) ar e owned by the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System on behalf of the WIDA Consortium. The WIDA ELP Standards are protected by United States copyright laws and may not be reproduced, modified, or written permission. The WIDA ELP Standards are for your personal, noncommercial use only. You may not alter or remove any trademark or copyright notice from the standards. Fair use of the WI DA ELP Standards includes reproduction for the purpose of teaching (including multiple copies for lesson planning). Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 7 of 10 Math education leaders from across the state were involv ed in creating the math crosswalk document. This team coded evid ence outcomes in the revised academic standards to indicate the degree of alignment wi th the previous standards. The comparison process involved only a consideration of math content not depth of knowledge. The revised academic standards articulate ex pectations by grade level through grade 8 and by standard for high school; the CSAP assessment framework shows grade by grade objectives for grades 3 through 10. As a pro xy for comparison of grade level content for the previous standards, the wo rking group used the objectiv es from the CSAP assessment framework as a referent. Grade level expectations were not part of th e comparison due to th e change from skill based statements in the previous standards and concept based statements in the revised standards. For example, an ob jective in the previous 5-8 stan dard on data and probability delineates this skill: Reading and constructing displays of data using appropriate techniques (for example, line graphs, circle graphs, scatter plots, box plots, stem-and-leaf plots) and In contrast, the revised 8 grade level expectation (3.1) describes specifically what students should know: Visual displays and summary statistics of two- variable data condense the information evidence that a student underst ands this concept are at the evidence outcome level, such as evidence outcome (c) Use time series plots (line graphs) For the math crosswalk, each evidence outcome was coded according to the degree of similarity with the CSAP asse Green indicates no significant the grade level CSAP assessment objective(s). Yellow indicates that there is a difference in some of the content in the evidence outcome and the grade level C SAP assessment objective(s). Red indicates that the evidence outcome repr esents new content at the grade level. Preschool through second grade evidence ou tcomes were not coded for two reasons: There is no assessment framework for these grades. (K-4) and the specificity of the grade level expectations in the revised standards is so great that color coding would provide little value. Instead, dist ricts are encouraged to use the District Notes and Implications columns of the docume nt to compare their K-2 expectations. In the referent column, CSAP assessment fr correspond with the revised evidence outcome are provided as well as notes on key differences. is no longer in each grade level and indicates where this content can be found in the revised standards. Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 8 of 10 Reading, Writing, and Communicating Given the existence of grade by grad e reading and writing CSAP assessment frameworks, the reading and writing working gr the best reference for a comparison to the previous reading, writing, and communicating Model Content Standards. The revised academic standards articulate expectations by grade level and the CSAP assessment framework shows grade by grade ob jectives for grades 3 through 10. As a proxy for comparison of grade level content fo r the previous standard s, the working group used the objectives from the CSAP a ssessment framework as a referent. Green indicates no significant the grade level CSAP assessment objective(s). Yellow indicates that there is a difference in some of the content in the evidence outcome and the grade level C SAP assessment objective(s). Red indicates that the evidence outcome repr esents new content at the grade level. Preschool through second grade evidence outc omes were not coded. The working group decided that such a compar ison would not be meaningf ul for two reasons: There are no assessment frameworks these grades. standards (K-4) and the specificity of the grade level expectations in the revised standards is so great that color coding woul d provide little value. Instead, districts are encouraged to use the District Notes and Implications columns of the document to compare their K-2 expectations. Grade level expectations have not been coded. The reason for this is the change from skill based standards statements in the previous standards and the largely concept based expectations in the revised st andards. The change in form at and nomenclature made a comparison difficult to a suggestion based docume nt that primarily focused on skill and, in some cases, included curricular level suggestions. An initial draft of a science crosswalk was developed by the CDE science content specialist in consultation with state science educators. A draf t was released to state science leaders for feedback which informed this version of the science crosswalk document. The analysis for the document compared th e grade level expectations (GLEs) of the revised academic standards to the benchmarks of the previous content standards. It also compared the revised evidence outcomes (EOs) and nature of science (NOS) statements to objectives in the CSAP assessment frameworks. One of the most significant ch anges in the science standards is the move to grade level standards. Because the previous standards were in grade bands and individual districts and schools chose at what grades th ose standards would be taught, it was not possible to do a statewide analysis of grade level changes and impacts. The column labeled district curriculum notes allows districts to do their own internal analys is of their current curriculum with the revised standards. Items were color-coded into three categories according to degree of change from the previous standards to the revised version of the standards. Items that are essentially unchanged have been coded green. Items that were present in the previous standards but had a significant change in the revised standa rds have been coded yellow. Items new to the revised have been coded red. Benchmark s and CSAP assessment framework items that Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 9 of 10 were in the previous standards that are not a part of the revised st andards are shown with separate headings at the end of a GL E page or the end of a grade band. The referent column gives the number and wording from the 2007 content standards or the CSAP assessment framework objective for items that are green and red as a An analysis of science GLEs found that ov er 70% of the content was in the previous standards. Many of the new GLEs come from the addition of preschool to the standards. This analysis shows the stre amlining of the standards, having 30% fewer GLEs than previous benchmarks.Thus, there is a large degree of consistency in science content students are expected to know and be able to An analysis of evidence ou tcomes and nature of scienc e statements to the CSAP framework objectives shows greater changes th an were found at the evidence outcome level. Many of these change s reflect the integration of 21 century and the post-secondary and workforce readiness skills, science inquiry, as well as greater depth of knowledge that was requested of the new standards. Over half of the new additions to the standards include classrooms across Colorado. Social Studies Social Studies district coordi nators supported the creation of a crosswalk document that could be used as an alignment tool for distri cts. In the absence of assessment frameworks for comparison, the coordinators used the previous standards matching benchmarks from the previous grade bands to the new grade by grade articulated evidence outcomes. In addition to the alignment of the evid ence outcomes and benchmarks, the team recommended that additional columns be added to facilitate the alignment work of districts. Like the other crosswalks, the fi rst column of the social studie s crosswalk is labeled "District Curriculum Notes" and is meant to allow for an analysis of the dist ricts current curriculum alignment to the new evidence outcomes. Th e next two columns are labeled "Intention" and "Implications" and are meant to facilitate district team discussions regarding the following: The concepts and skills intended in the new document. What, if any, attention should be placed on implementation needs. In other words, what should students know and be able to do and what resources (i.e., time, An example is provided here to illustrate how this part of the crosswalk might be used. Construct and defend a writte n historical argument using relevant primary and second ary sources as evidence. The crosswalk indicates that this aligns to th e “History 2” in the previous standards. However, historical argument is a new concept/skill in the evidence outcomes that was not previously in the history standards. Use of the crosswalk prompt s district curriculum alignment teams to discuss the intention and implications for implementation of this concept/skill as teams align the district curriculum to the revised standards. Questions curriculum co mmittees might ask about implementation might include: What needs do individual staff members have? Should the district have a this topic for social studies teachers? Has a teacher already been doing this and ca n they share what they do with others? Monday, March 15, 2010 Page 10 of 10 In conclusion, there are a few general points that were found as the team worked on the creation of this document. Grade by grade articulation has led to a sequence of content. Overall, the level of rigor, depth, and critical thinking has increased. In history, creating and defending historic al arguments based on evidence is new. Geography standard 3 from the previous standards was relocated to the science standards. In the revised geography standards, aski ng geographic questions is new and the depth of analysis is very rigorous. In civics, students are asked to "engage responsible and civically engaged citizens. In economics, personal financial literacy is a new area which is evident P-12. In economics, the revised standards have shifted toward “economic thinking” with concepts and skills as a means to that end. World Languages crosswalk is intended as a tool for distri ct to conduct an indi vidualized curriculum comparison. The format is the same as all of the other crosswalks and can be used in a similar manner.