What are steps you can take in your classroom to support students’ conceptual understanding of a topic?

1. Use rubrics regularly.  Rubrics help identify the essential concepts and skills under scrutiny.  Also, providing two copies of a rubric (one filled out by you, the other filled out by the student) can be particularly effective in fostering student ownership of the learning process.
2. Incorporate language that aligns with the CCSS into rubrics, but language that is unpacked to the degree that it is accessible to students (our Reference Guide Library of “I can…” learning targets can be helpful here).
3. Have students periodically reflect on the concepts and skills you’re covering in class through a written reflection.  This is an opportunity not only to encourage metacognition (having kids think about their ability to think) which has been proven to increase student engagement and demystify learning, but also to gain a better understanding of each student’s strengths and weaknesses.  This, of course, opens the door for
4. Differentiation.  Some schools are experimenting with the “flipped classroom” approach in math, where students are introduced to mathematical concepts specific to their skill level at home (usually via video tutorials), and then work more independently or individually with a teacher during class in a workshop-type setting.  If your school doesn’t encourage the flipped classroom approach, you can still point out free resources, tools, and video libraries (like the Khan Academy) available for students who need additional support or enrichment activities.

The post Four Tips for Fostering Conceptual Understanding in Math appeared first on Corestand.

True, there are exceptions.  Once on a debate tournament, I found myself in a walnut-paneled workroom (the school will remain nameless) where a PTA-donated buffet offered shrimp cocktail, paté, and bottles of chilled Perrier.

But what the average teacher workroom lacks in Feng Shui is usually compensated by lively and spirited conversations about curriculum and instructional strategies.  After all, most teachers are passionate about what they teach.  We’re an opinionated group, and even if we’re presenting opposing viewpoints about what we think is best for our students, we’re committed to exploring issues from multiple angles and perspectives—even if it’s over a mediocre sub sandwich from the school cafeteria.

As I discussed in my previous blog, the CCSS have been designed to develop students’ mathematical thinking—that is, understanding math at a much deeper level. To this end, the Standards reflect coherence from grade to grade: having students think across grade levels and link back to the major concepts and skills within each grade.

What does this mean for you?

First and foremost, to what degree has vertical alignment (aligning concepts and skills across grade levels) played a role in your department and/or school?  Perhaps the interactions you and your colleagues have in the teacher’s lounge include brainstorming ways to build upon units and essential concepts and skills from grade to grade.  Perhaps you’ve already organized yourselves into instructional teams or Professional Learning Communities (PLCs), either in grade level groups or in vertical teams.  Or perhaps you’ve been mostly free to go about your own business as long as you loosely follow the scope and sequence outlined by a textbook or curriculum map.

If you fall into the last category, consider rethinking your approach as a department.  Now, more than ever, collaborative teams formed amongst math teachers are essential, especially since specific math Standards in the Common Core framework are not to be seen as new “events” in a student’s learning cycle, but as a continuation of the previous year’s learning.  Working together with teachers above and below your grade level can help identify key concepts and applications to which you can refer frequently so students see the connection to what they’ve already learned and what they can expect to build on in the future.

Second, one essential guidepost to keep in mind is that you want to make sure that each topic you teach supports a major concept or skill outlined at each grade level.  This will provide pathways for you to link grade-specific activities and topics to larger, broader skill bands.  For example, instead of incorporating a unit on data displays for its own sake, push students to examine how data displays enhance and inform word problems.  They will continue to see the connection between mathematical visuals and mathematical language, and will be able to (with support and guidance) refer back to experiences in years prior to develop a conceptual understanding of a mathematical topic.  More on that in my next post.

The post More Than Ever, Collaborative Teams in Math are Essential appeared first on Corestand.

Looking at my first graders at our little table in the room, it’s clear to me that their main focus for reading is simply getting through the book. They struggle sometimes word by word hoping to impress me with their reading fluency. They compete for who can complete the book first no matter how many times I try to stifle their competitive nature. I always have a post-it note full of questions to ask them after reading depending on the objective for the day. But it’s a struggle. It’s almost like I’m tricking them into actually reading the book and I generally end up modeling the answer for them.

This particular day is focused on organizing details. I tell them before we begin that we’ll be putting details from the book into different categories. The book is titled “City Animals”. It shows which animals live in the city, which come out at night, what insects you can find in the park, or what animals can live with you in your house. It is an excellent book for sorting out details. After they read, I put the names of the animals in the book on several index cards and lay them out on the table.

“Now, I asked you to try and remember details from the story so we can organize them. Can someone choose an index card of an animal that comes out at night?”

“POSSUM!!! POSSUM!!”, Abu jumps out of his chair to grab an index card.

“Great job, Abu! Anything else?”

“Foxes, too!” Josh slaps his hand on the table on top of the index card labeled “FOX”.

Erik, the third student I have with me that day sits quietly with his fist on his chin and his eyes squinted. They all look at the index cards.

“I don’t remember…” Erik whispers.

“Well, what does the book tell you Erik?”

“Pigeon?” Erik guesses.

“Well, why don’t you go back and see what the book tells you.”

Erik sits quietly with an obvious look of confusion on his face. “Wait a minute…we’re allowed to look in the book?”

That question hit me like a punch in the stomach. Wait a minute, have we not been practicing looking through the book this whole year???  We’ve been discussing the books we read and I’ve asked them questions about it and expected answers but very rarely have I asked them to go back and search for an answer.  I change my plan immediately…

“Let’s all try and search through the book to find another animal that comes out at night.”

The boys search frantically through their book trying to find it. They constantly look up at each other to see if anyone has found the answer yet.

“Here! Moths!”  Erik grabs the index card so tight he bends it.  “Moths come out at night!”

“How do you know that Erik?  I don’t see it,” I respond quizzically.

“It’s right here!  It says they like the lights from the street lamps so they must come out at night.”

Not only did Erik find me evidence from the book, he took it a step further and made an inference!  I grabbed his shoulders and said, “Whoa Erik! Great job finding that in the story! Can anyone else show me another insect that comes out at night?”

The lesson went on like this as we organized all of the details from insects, from animals that like water  to ways you can attract animals to your home. We got a lot done and it was clear the students were amazed at how easy it was to show me answers from the book.

This past week has been full of eye-openers for both me and my first graders. The more I expect them to find evidence in the text, the more they do it on their own. This time they have found a new competition: find the page the gives the answer to the question.  Not just read the book as fast as you can. I still have a lot to learn, but I think I’m making some big strides for my future middle schoolers!

The post A Snapshot of Close Reading in First Grade appeared first on Corestand.

Indeed, the program is being touted as a time saving method for professors.  However, another group of educators, Professionals Against Machine Scoring of Student Essays in High Stakes Assessment, has arisen to fight the use of such software.   In a statement put out by the group, they assert what surely many of us who grade papers know intuitively:  “Computers cannot ‘read.’ They cannot measure the essentials of effective written communication: accuracy, reasoning, adequacy of evidence, good sense, ethical stance, convincing argument, meaningful organization, clarity, and veracity, among others.”

But there’s something else missing from this debate.  Or, more accurately, someone missing from this debate:  our students.

The  “Distinguished” level of  the third domain of the Danielson Rubric, “Using Assessment in Instruction” spells it out clearly:  “Assessment is fully integrated into instruction, through extensive use of formative assessment.   Students appear to be aware of, and there is some evidence that they have contributed to, the assessment criteria.  Questions and assessments are used regularly to diagnose evidence of learning by individual students.  A variety of forms of feedback, from both teacher and peers, is accurate and specific and advances learning.  Students self-assess and monitor their own progress.  The teacher successfully differentiates instruction to address individual student’s misunderstandings.”

Boiled down, what is Danielson asking of us?  To build feedback loops into our classrooms, where assessment acts as an ongoing dialogue between teachers and students, and sometimes among the students themselves.  In other words, those burdensome papers that sometimes make Sunday evenings feel like marathon grading sessions are not simply tasks to be dealt with, but opportunities for us to assess what our students are truly understanding and to tailor our instruction accordingly.  For example, if the majority of my students do not understand how to include a counterargument in an essay, guess what I will be addressing in class the next day?  If I see that certain students have nailed the skill of integrating evidence smoothly into a paragraph, perhaps the next day I will pair them with the students less skilled in this area for a mini-lesson.

As we continue to get our collective heads around both the Common Core Standards and the Danielson Rubric, it’s important to remember that the hard work of teaching writing is also quite messy.  As much as we’d like to streamline it, via a machine or some other method, the truth is, there’s no substitute for the brainstorming sessions, the drafting, the revising, the editing, and the formal and informal assessments that are the hallmark of a distinguished teacher’s classroom.  Every time we read student work, we’re given a chance to reflect on our own teaching and to ask ourselves how well we’ve embedded literacy practice into our classrooms.  Every time we ask students to assess themselves, we’re provided with terrific insight into their ability to monitor their own learning.  We’re more able to  accurately see how aligned our instruction is to the Common Core.  Mostly, we’re erasing that invisible line that exists between teacher and student, a necessary step that makes us much more than graders—indeed, that makes us human.

To learn more, please visit our team-led VLC dedicated to the Danielson Framework.

The post Learning By Grading: Another Look at the Danielson Framework appeared first on Corestand.

“It’s ridiculous,” a man said returning from class, a stack of worksheets in hand. “They contend that students these days need less math.”  He dropped a the stack on his desk and sighed.

The woman sitting next to him looked up.  It was clear this wasn’t the first time they had approached the subject.  “Couldn’t agree more,” she said.  “I keep saying to the administration, how are my kids supposed to compete in a global economy if they’re getting whipped by kids in other countries?  And we’re supposed to align to a new framework that says…do less?”

I’ve heard versions of this conversation from all corners of the country.  And the data emerging comparing student achievement among global powers is certainly a catalyst for debate.  (Here’s an example: the total number of Chinese students ranked in the top 10% is larger than the entire student population here in the US).

In light of this, many teachers contend that, because the framework of the Common Core Standards calls for fewer topics covered in a math course, the curriculum will end up being watered down and our students will end up being unprepared.  Yet this perception isn’t accurate, and the research behind the CCSS framework, in fact, points us in the opposite direction.  Simply put, students need to “think” mathematics, not “know” mathematics.  They need to develop mathematical fluency, understanding how and why math works so that they can apply this understanding to whatever career they choose (and many of these careers have yet to be invented).  And to nurture this fluency, teachers should help students take a deeper dive into fewer concepts.

Part of what’s driving this change is an effort to move away from covering content according to the “mile-wide, inch-deep” approach.  So the CCSS identify major concepts and skills to serve as anchors for each grade.  These concepts and skills were identified because they are essential to developing foundations students will build off of in subsequent grades. Ideally, students develop a deeper understanding of the concepts and skills so that they become more fluent in their mathematical thinking by applying the characteristics and relationships to higher order work in subsequent grades.

For example, possessing an in-depth understanding not only how fractions work, but why they work they way they do provides a solid foundation for understanding algebraic functions at higher grade levels.

I’ll continue to explore the essential shifts of the the math Standards in subsequent posts.  In the meantime, you can read more about them in the second edition of CoreStand’s e-book: The Ninja’s Guide to the Common Core Standards.

The post Thinking Math: A Discussion about The Common Core State Standards appeared first on Corestand.

Today, divorce is a common life crisis, with more than one million occurring in the United States annually. Those families contain our students, however we may not be informed of the separation progression or status of the family circumstances. Students experiencing family dissolution may have a more difficult time with academic and social expectations than children from intact or established blended families. This silent stressor weighs down their spirit, especially because how parents interact with each other, both before and after the divorce may have a far greater impact on children than the actual divorce itself.

Maternal depression, which certainly can manifest as a result of such disruption in a family’s stability, can also negatively affect children’s behavior and development. Another stressor’s children often experience, like myself, includes taking on additional, often adult roles such as child care in the evening while their mother works the night shift. Resulting conduct problems include guilt, rage, sadness, depression, and anxiety; disrupted and insecure attachment patterns, as well as symptoms consistent with PTSD, and decreased academic performance.

How can we as educators provide support to our students during this vulnerable period? One consideration is the integration of social and emotional learning (SEL) into our classrooms. SEL is the deliberate introduction of self-awareness, social awareness, self-management, responsible decision‐making, and relationship management skills. Ideally schools address SEL school-wide nonetheless, teachers can supplement such efforts with materials specifically geared toward the social challenges their students face. The books below address divorce and are perfect for a classroom library.

Age 3 and up:

• Dinosaurs Divorce (A Guide for Changing Families), by Marc Brown and Laurie Krasny Brown
• No Es Tu Culpa, Koko Oso: It’s Not Your Fault, Koko Bear, (Spanish Edition), by Vicki Lansky
• Standing on My Own Two Feet: A Child’s Affirmation of Love in the Midst of Divorce, by Tamara Schmitz
• Two Homes, by Claire Masurel

Age 5 and up:

• I Don’t Want to Talk about It, by Jeanie Franz Ransom and Kathryn Kunz Finney
• My Stick Family: Helping Children Cope with Divorce, by Natalie June Reilly and Brandi J. Pavese
• Was It the Chocolate Pudding?: A Story for Little Kids about Divorce, by Sandra Levins
• When My Parents Forgot How to Be Friends, by Jennifer Moore-Mallinos and Marta Fabrega

Age 8 and up:

• Best of the Best: A Baseball Great Novel, by Tim Green
• Dear Mr. Henshaw, by Beverly Cleary
• Divorce Is Not the End of the World: Zoe’s and Evan’s Coping Guide for Kids, by Zoe Stern and Evan Stern
• What in the World Do You Do When Your Parents Divorce? A Survival Guide for Kids, by Kent Winchester J.D. and Roberta Beyer J.D.
• Where am I Sleeping Tonight?, by Carol Gordon Ekster

Age 10 and up:

• A Smart Girl’s Guide to Her Parents’ Divorce: How to Land on Your Feet When Your World Turns Upside Down, by Nancy Holyoke
• Don’t Fall Apart on Saturdays! The Children’s Divorce-Survival Book, by Adolph Moser
• My Parents Are Divorced Too: A Book for Kids by Kids, by Melanie Ford, Steven Ford, Annie Ford, and Jann Blackstone-Ford
• When Mom and Dad Separate: Children Can Learn to Cope with Grief from Divorce, by Marge Heegaard

Age 12 and up:

• Divorce Survival Guide For Kids: Tips To Survive Your Parents Divorce: For Kids, Written By Kids, by Samantha Smith
• It’s Not the End of the World, by Judy Blume
• The Divorce Helpbook for Teens, by Cynthia MacGregor

If you recommend any other titles, or have input on activities that support children experiencing divorce, feel free to share them. Future entries here will address bullying, media usage, classroom management and a variety of other SEL subjects. We hope to provide both resources and dialogue regarding these topics, and look forward to your contributions.

The post How Social and Emotional Learning Can Help With Divorce appeared first on Corestand.

• - Take a deep dive into the essential themes, or “shifts” of the CCSS,
• - learn more about how the Standards have been adopted nationwide,
• - and access new best practice lessons and units that are Core-aligned and demonstrate our signature C.O.R.E. classroom principles: Current, Obtainable, Rigorous, and Exemplar-based.

DOWNLOAD

The post CoreStand’s New Ebook: The Ninja’s Guide to the Common Core Standards appeared first on Corestand.

Indeed, the program is being touted as a time saving method for professors.  However, another group of educators, Professionals Against Machine Scoring of Student Essays in High Stakes Assessment, has arisen to fight the use of such software.   In a statement put out by the group, they assert what surely many of us who grade papers know intuitively:  “Computers cannot ‘read’.  They cannot measure the essentials of effective written communication: accuracy, reasoning, adequacy of evidence, good sense, ethical stance, convincing argument, meaningful organization, clarity, and veracity, among others”.

But there’s something else missing from this debate.  Or, more accurately, someone missing from this debate:  our students.

The  “Distinguished” level of  the third domain of the Danielson Rubric, “Using Assessment in Instruction”, spells it out clearly:

Assessment is fully integrated into instruction, through extensive use of formative assessment.   Students appear to be aware of, and there is some evidence that they have contributed to, the assessment criteria.  Questions and assessments are used regularly to diagnose evidence of learning by individual students.  A variety of forms of feedback, from both teacher and peers, is accurate and specific and advances learning.  Students self-assess and monitor their own progress.  The teacher successfully differentiates instruction to address individual student’s misunderstandings.

Boiled down, what is Danielson asking of us?  To build feedback loops into our classrooms, where assessment acts as an ongoing dialogue between teachers and students, and sometimes among the students themselves.  In other words, those burdensome papers that sometimes make Sunday evenings feel like marathon grading sessions are not simply tasks to be dealt with, but opportunities for us to assess what our students are truly understanding and to tailor our instruction accordingly.  For example, if the majority of my students do not understand how to include a counterargument in an essay, guess what I will be addressing in class the next day?  If I see that certain students have nailed the skill of integrating evidence smoothly into a paragraph, perhaps the next day I will pair them with the students less skilled in this area for a mini-lesson.

As we continue to get our collective heads around both the Common Core Standards and the Danielson Rubric, it’s important to remember that the hard work of teaching writing is also quite messy.  As much as we’d like to streamline it, via a machine or some other method, the truth is, there’s no substitute for the brainstorming sessions, the drafting, the revising, the editing, and the formal and informal assessments that are the hallmark of a distinguished teacher’s classroom.  Every time we read student work, we’re given a chance to reflect on our own teaching and to ask ourselves how well we’ve embedded literacy practice into our classrooms.  Every time we ask students to assess themselves, we’re provided with terrific insight into their ability to monitor their own learning.  We’re more able to  accurately see how aligned our instruction is to the Common Core.  Mostly, we’re erasing that invisible line that exists between teacher and student, a necessary step that makes us much more than graders—indeed, that makes us human.

The post Are Robots Right on Writing Assessments? appeared first on Corestand.

DOWNLOAD

The post The Bigger Picture: 10 Common Core Facts You Should Know [INFOGRAPHIC] appeared first on Corestand.

It was clear to me throughout the meeting that teachers were becoming increasingly overwhelmed by the magnitude of the CCSS. Text complexity, a focus on non-fiction, looking at multiple texts…“there’s reading for information, reading for literature, writing, speaking and listening, AND language?” one teacher asked. People were looking down, one hand on their head, the other ferociously highlighting or writing down questions and comments about the Standards. As I was watching this unfold, I thought back to my first experience with the Common Core State Standards. I had the same thoughts, the same actions, and the same questions. “This is great, but how do I do this in my classroom? How do I test this? How do I put all of this together?” And so this time when I was reading those first few pages of the Standards, I read it with a much less critical (or nervous) eye.  What I found was that the introduction to the framework essentially says, “Look. I know this looks hard and overwhelming but I promise it will be okay”. The most refreshing part I read was page 6, what is NOT a part of the Standards. Do me a favor and click on this link:

http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/introduction/key-design-consideration

Now scroll to the bottom. Read the last section. This to me was so unique for any educational initiative. “Here’s what we AREN’T doing,” it says.  We’re not telling you how to teach, we’re not telling you this is the only thing you can teach from, we’re not pretending to say these are the only skills that will prepare your students for the real world. We don’t address advanced students, special education students, or English Language Learners. We’re trusting that YOU can make those decisions as their teacher.

After we discussed this section of the Standards, the mood in the room changed. Teachers were asking how to accommodate various students’ needs and which standards are realistic in the little amount of time we have with those kids. They began believing in the Standards because the authors of the standards essentially say you’re the teacher, you do what you think is best—we’re just giving you a guide. It gives the power back to the teacher, and in the end, that’s really the only thing we want.

The post What Isn’t Included in the Common Core State Standards appeared first on Corestand.