Orwell Award Announcement SusanOhanian.Org Home


Common Core State [sic] Standards

 

705 in the collection  

    With Bill Gates Money, David Coleman Takes Over the World


    NOTE: I now believe in conspiracy theories. I know that Bill Gates and David Coleman are out to get me. I have spent ALL DAY working on this piece. TWICE I've been almost finished and the page I was working on disappeared from the Internet. In my ten years of posting items on this site, this has never happened before.

    Now for the third time, I've had to look up all hot links. I can't tell you the feeling of starting to add something to the page, which was 93.47% finished and watch the whole page vanish.

    This happened twice.

    Sob.

    They ARE out to get me.

    Okay, one more time. . . . I try again because this IS important.


    by Susan Ohanian

    You can find Close Reading Exemplars at Achieve the Core, the site founded by David Coleman and Partners in the enterprise Student Achievement Partners, which recently received $18 million from the GE Foundation "to assist states nationwide in implementing the Common Core State Standards."

    According to Education Week the Partners' aim is to "build a storehouse of instructional resources in support of the new learning goals." [Student Achievement Partners also has three contracts with the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and a grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, worth $4.1 million total, to do Common Core-related work.]

    In a statement to Philanthropy News Digest Student Achievement Partners founding partner David Colemen modestly said, "This is a great day for the education reform movement and specifically for the momentum behind the Common Core State Standards." He said the GE Foundation "commitment to improving public education for all students is exactly what it is going to take to seed real and lasting change, especially during these tough economic times."

    Exactly what it is going to take.

    There you have it: David Coleman knows the answers. As it happens, he knows the exact answers.

    This must be true. Surely, if he didn't have the exact answers, then NCTE, IRA, NCTM, ASCD, the PTA, the National School Boards Association, the NEA, the AFT, and a host of other organizations organized to educate children would protest.

    Since there's not a word of dissent coming out of these organizations, then David Coleman and Partners must have the goods--exactly what teachers and students need.

    A word on David Coleman: Apparently, he achieved his expertise about exactly what schoolchildren need from tutoring students while attending Yale, taking some courses in English Literature at Oxford and Cambridge, and working for five years at McKinsey and Company.

    Ah, McKinsey, put it in a 'search' on this website and you will find 76 not-so-laudatory hits. For starters,read Frank Coffield's Journal of Education Policy assessment. And don't miss Michael Martin's review

    Here's an excerpt from how McKinsey described itself in 2010:

    System Strategy and Transformation
    We work with clients to transform education systems to deliver improved individual, social, and economic outcomes. Our education teams diagnose the performance of an education system against global best practices and identify the highest-impact opportunities for change. We also design and implement "delivery" programs that aim to ensure that frontline transformation occurs and is sustainable.
    David Coleman and Partners seems to have taken this delivery metaphor to heart.

    Teaching and learning systems as a delivery system is one of the most dangerous concepts flourishing today.

    A lot of the wrong-headed pedagogy is revealed in these two repeated phrases:
    The student will. . .

    This lesson can be delivered . . .
    As a longtime 7th grade teacher, over the years I've frequently declared that on a really good day the best a teacher can say is a student might. . .

    Parvenus like Bill Gates and David Coleman operate in a world of exactitude. To be a teacher is to live with perpetual uncertainty.

    They don't get that.

    I once took an experimental test administered by New York University professors operating under a National Endowment for the Humanities grant. The test revealed I have a very high tolerance for ambiguity. I regarded it as proof I was well-suited for classrooms filled with students with difficulties.

    The ability to respond well to perpetual uncertainty is the hallmark of good teaching. You get up every morning not knowing what will happen. . . and you welcome that uncertainty.

    Directives for Teachers

    Below, look at a few Close Reading Exemplars from the $18 million (plus $4.1 million) site. Carefully read the directions Coleman and Partners give to teachers. For example, they dictate that teachers should read Tom Sawyer aloud because Accurate and skillful modeling of the reading provides students who may be dysfluent with accurate pronunciations and syntactic patterns of English.

    Take a look at this sample passage provided by Coleman and Partners and see how helpful it will be to "dysfluent [sic] students" in understanding the syntactic patterns of English.
    He took up his brush and went tranquilly to work. Ben Rogers hove in sight presently--the very boy, of all boys, whose ridicule he had been dreading. Ben's gait was the hop-skip-and-jump--proof enough that his heart was light and his anticipations high. He was eating an apple, and giving a long, melodious whoop, at intervals, followed by a deep-toned ding-dong-dong, ding-dong-dong, for he was personating a steamboat. As he drew near, he slackened speed, took the middle of the street, leaned far over to starboard and rounded to ponderously and with laborious pomp and circumstance--for he was personating the Big Missouri, and considered himself to be drawing nine feet of water. He was boat and captain and engine-bells combined, so he had to imagine himself standing on his own hurricane-deck giving the orders and executing them. . .

    "Stop her, sir! Ting-a-ling-ling!" The headway ran almost out, and he drew up slowly toward the sidewalk. "Ship up to back! Ting-a-ling-ling!" His arms straightened and stiffened down his sides.

    "Set her back on the stabboard! Ting-a-ling-ling! Chow! ch-chow-wow! Chow!" His right hand, meantime, describing stately circles--for it was representing a forty-foot wheel.

    "Let her go back on the labboard! Ting-a-lingling! Chow-ch-chow-chow!" The left hand began to describe circles. "Stop the stabboard! Ting-a-ling-ling! Stop the labboard! Come ahead on the stabboard! Stop her! Let your outside turn over slow! Ting-a-ling-ling! Chow-ow-ow! Get out that head-line! LIVELY now! Come--out with your spring-line--what're you about there! Take a turn round that stump with the bight of it! Stand by that stage, now--let her go! Done with the engines, sir! Ting-a-ling-ling! SH'T! S'H'T! SH'T!" (trying the gauge-cocks).
    I say this often: Writing about education means never having to make anything up to get a laugh.

    But the laugh here is sick. . . it comes at the expense of millions of students. . . students who have no defense except smart, caring teachers willing to stand up and say, "No!"

  • No! to Bill Gates and his millions.
  • No! to the GE Foundation and its millions.
  • No! to David Coleman and his arrogance.
  • No! to NCTE, IRA, NCTM, ASCD,the PTA, the National School Boards Association, the NEA, the AFT, and associated groups for their complicit behavior

  • A Lesson on How to Be Wrong for Kids

    Currently, Coleman and Partners present nine Close Reading Exemplars They are presented as Word documents. You can access them here.

    Common Core entrepreneur David Coleman often proclaims that all students must be exposed to "difficult text," and he seems to feel if they are exposed enough times, poor readers will "get it." So here, Coleman and Partners revive the long-discredited Round Robin Reading. Well, skillful readers read aloud. Not-so-skillful students follow along in the text.

    Right. How many stormtroopers will have to be in the classroom to keep those students "following the text?"

    These directions given for Grade 8,Words We Live By: Your Annotated Guide to the Constitution by Linda R. Monk are pretty much repeated for every lesson offered on the Student Achievement Partners site. They are worth a close read--to provide ammunition for outrage.
    Reading Task: Rereading is deliberately built into the instructional unit. Students will silently read the passage in question on a given day--first independently and then following along with the text as the teacher and/or skillful students read aloud. Depending on the difficulties of a given text and the teacher's knowledge of the fluency abilities of students, the order of the student silent read and the teacher reading aloud with students following might be reversed. What is important is to allow all students to interact with challenging text on their own as frequently and independently as possible. Students will then reread specific passages in response to a set of concise, text-dependent questions that compel them to examine the meaning and structure of Monk's argument.

    Vocabulary Task: Most of the meanings of words in this selection can be discovered from careful reading of the context in which they appear. Where it is judged this is not possible, underlined words are defined briefly for students in a separate column whenever the original text is reproduced. At times, this is all the support these words need. At other times, particularly with abstract words, teachers will need to spend more time explaining and discussing these words. Teachers can use discussions to model and reinforce how to learn vocabulary from contextual clues. Students must be held accountable for engaging in this practice. In addition, for subsequent readings, high value academic ('Tier Two') words have been bolded to draw attention to them. Given how crucial vocabulary knowledge is to students' academic and career success, it is essential that these high value words be discussed and lingered over during the instructional sequence.

    Sentence Syntax Task: On occasion students will encounter particularly difficult sentences to decode. Teachers should engage in a close examination of such sentences to help students discover how they are built and how they convey meaning. While many questions addressing important aspects of the text double as questions about syntax, students should receive regular supported practice in deciphering complex sentences. It is crucial that the help they receive in unpacking text complexity focuses both on the precise meaning of what the author is saying and why the author might have constructed the sentence in this particular fashion. That practice will in turn support students' ability to unpack meaning from syntactically complex sentences they encounter in future reading.

    Discussion Task: Students will discuss the passage in depth with their teacher and their classmates, performing activities that result in a close reading of Monk's text. The goal is to foster student confidence when encountering complex text and to reinforce the skills they have acquired regarding how to build and extend their understanding of a text. A general principle is to always reread the portion of text that provides evidence for the question under discussion. This gives students another encounter with the text, reinforces the use of text evidence, and helps develop fluency.

    Writing Task: Students will paraphrase Thurgood Marshall's quote and then write an explanation of Monk's text in response to one of three prompts. Teachers might afford students the opportunity to rewrite their explanation or revise their in-class paraphrase after participating in classroom discussion, allowing them to refashion both their understanding of the text and their expression of that understanding.

    Text Selection: This selection, taken from Appendix B of the CCSS, while brief, allows for an in-depth investigation into three of the most highly charged words in the Constitution and offers a capsule history of the dramatic and sweeping changes to how the phrase "We the People" has been interpreted over the years. Rich both in meaning and vocabulary, not only does the excerpt from Monk's text validate the close reading approach, but it also presents a focused and concise opportunity that students in both ELA and history classrooms will find engaging.

    Outline of Lesson Plan: This lesson can be delivered in one or two days of instruction and reflection on the part of students and their teacher, with the possibility of adding additional days of instruction (see Appendix A) or an additional day devoted to peer review and revision of the culminating writing assignment.

    Standards Covered: The following Common Core State Standards are the focus of this exemplar: RI.8.1-3, RI.8.5, RI.8.6; W.8.2, W.8.4, W.8.9.

    Directions for Teachers

    1. Introduce the text and students read independently

    Other than giving the brief definitions offered to words students would likely not be able to define from context (underlined in the text), avoid giving any background context or instructional guidance at the outset of the lesson while students are reading the text silently. This close reading approach forces students to rely exclusively on the text instead of privileging background knowledge and levels the playing field for all students as they seek to comprehend Monk's argument. It is critical to cultivating independence and creating a culture of close reading that students initially grapple with rich texts like Monk's passage without the aid of prefatory material, extensive notes, or even teacher explanations.

    2. Read the passage out loud as students follow along

    Asking students to listen to Words We Live By exposes students a second time to the content and structure of her argument before they begin their own close reading of the text. Speaking clearly and carefully will allow students to follow the shape of Monk's argument, and reading out loud with students following along improves fluency while offering all students access to this complex text. Accurate and skillful modeling of the reading provides students who may be dysfluent with accurate pronunciations and syntactic patterns of English.

    3. Ask the class to answer a small set of text-dependent guided questions and perform targeted tasks about the passage, with answers in the form of notes, annotations to the text, or more formal responses as appropriate.

    As students move through these questions, and reread Monk's text, be sure to check for and reinforce their understanding of academic vocabulary in the corresponding text (which will be boldfaced the first time it appears in the text). At times, the questions may focus on academic vocabulary.

    (Q1) What is (and isn't) the meaning of "popular sovereignty"? Why does Monk claim that this is the form of government in America?
    These are fairly straightforward questions for students to answer but must be grasped to understand the remainder of Monk's analysis. The second question requires students to infer that the first three words of the Constitution refer to the doctrine of popular sovereignty, and perceptive students will be able to connect the title of the chapter and/or the opening of the second paragraph to the Constitution's Preamble
    And so on and so on and so on. Very similar generic directions are given with each Exemplar Text.

    Eight More Exemplar Texts and Lessons Brought to Teachers of America by The National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the GE Foundation, David Coleman, and Quisling Yes-Men

    Grade 6, "The Making of a Scientist"--Richard Feynman biography from Cricket You can find the lesson and my discussion here.

    Reading the small print: At the end of the last appendix to this lesson plan, one reads:
    This work was supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
    Grade 6, The Great Fire by Jim Murphy

    Reading the small print: At the end of the last appendix to this lesson plan, one reads:
    This work was supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
    Grade 7, The Adventures of Tom Sawyer by Mark Twain
    Asking students to listen to Twain's The Adventures of Tom Sawyer exposes students a second time to the rhythms and meaning of his language before they begin their own close reading of the text. Speaking clearly and carefully will allow students to follow the shape of Twain's story, and reading out loud with students following along improves fluency while offering all students access to this complex text. Accurate and skillful modeling of the reading provides students who may be dysfluent[sic] with accurate pronunciations and syntactic patterns of English.

    Homework
    For homework, choose one of the following prompts to complete:

  • Construct a narrative that teaches the same lesson(s) that Tom learns at the end of the passage. Incorporate both the voice of a narrator, as well as dialogue in your story.
  • Write a parody of the scene by changing the characters and work being done to reflect a modern dilemma.

    During the next class period the stories could be peer reviewed, shared as public speaking opportunities, and/or time could be set aside to revise them.
  • Reading the small print: At the end of the last appendix to this lesson plan, one reads:
    This work was supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
    Grade 7, "Farewell to Manzanar" and "Unbroken"

    Here are some "Simon Says"-type teacher instructions:
    Teachers should feel free to pace this activity in such a way that fits the largest cross section of learners in their classrooms."
    Wowser!

    Thank you for granting this freedom.

    Furthermore:
    Students can use reading journals as part of a structured/periodic assignment focused on expanding students' their understanding of how full texts can be multifaceted and useful for building literary skills along with historical understandings of particular time periods, events, and people. Through this sustained activity, students will identify larger historical themes as evident throughout the text, select meaningful passages and quotes with analysis/display of thinking.
    Reading the small print: At the end of the last appendix to this lesson plan, one reads:
    This work was supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
    Grade 8, "The Long Night of the Little Boat" by Basil Heatter

    Here's Writing Process a la Coleman:
    1. The teacher guides students on using graphic organizer (see Appendix E) to put their thoughts together in essay form.

    2. The teacher guides students in writing an introduction from their essay based on the summary they wrote earlier in the sequence.

    3. The students write their essays in chunks, using their notes from the day before and the graphic organizer for help.
    NOTE: Basil Heatter wrote a lot of potboilers. Eighth graders might well be more interested in Heatter's Harry and the Bikini Bandits, where the story is told first-person by a horny 17-year-old.

    Grade 8, Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave
    Summary of Activities
    1. Teacher introduces the day's passage with minimal commentary and students read it independently. (5 minutes)
    2. Teacher or a skillful reader then reads the passage out loud to the class as students follow along in the text. (5 minutes)
    3. Teacher asks the class to discuss the first set of text-dependent questions and perform targeted tasks about the passage, with answers in the form of notes, annotations to the text, or more formal responses as appropriate. (40 minutes)
    4. Teacher then assigns a paragraph that asks students to write an analysis of Douglass' text.

    Introduce the passage and students read independently.

    Other than giving the brief definitions offered to words students would likely not be able to define from context (underlined in the text), avoid giving any background context or instructional guidance at the outset of the lesson while students are reading the text silently. This close reading approach forces students to rely exclusively on the text instead of privileging background knowledge and levels the playing field for all students as they seek to comprehend Douglass's prose. [emphasis added] It is critical to cultivating independence and creating a culture of close reading that students initially grapple with rich texts like Douglass' text without the aid of prefatory material, extensive notes, or even teacher explanations.
    Reading the small print: At the end of the last appendix to this lesson plan, one reads:
    This work was supported by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
    There will be plenty of teacher evaluators who appreciate knowing how many minutes each segment of the lesson is designed to take.

    Grades 9-10, "Gettysburg Address"

    You can see David Coleman's infamous presentation of this lesson [and read transcript] here

    Grades 11-12, "Living Like Weasels" by Annie Dillard
    Writing Assessment Guidance for Teachers and Students

    Students should write an adequately planned and well-constructed informative essay regarding the meaning of the essay's title -- "Living Like Weasels". Why has the author chosen this title? Why is it significance? Students should include at least three pieces of evidence from the text to support their thoughts.

    Strong essays should explore the desire for humans to live (like weasels) by instinct and necessity. Students may also choose to describe the choice humans have to "latch on" to the life they choose and how Dillard symbolically represents that choice. Whatever avenue students choose, they must cite three pieces of textual evidence and clearly explain the connection between their evidence and how this supports their ideas on the essay's title.

    If teachers assign this essay for homework, they could have a writing workshop the following day, where students provide feedback to their classmates regarding their essay. Following this, students may be given the opportunity to revisit their essay for homework.

    Teachers could also assign the prompt as an in-class essay, but also use the following day for peer-to-peer feedback.
    This lesson adds an Extension Reading in Appendix A: "The Fish" by Elizabeth Bishop. This was on the NAEP 8th grade test, where they offered a relentless series of essay questions.

    It is troubling to note how formulaic the answers receiving Full Comprehension credit are. Of course it's too much to ask that a respondent's "voice" come through on a test, but the NAEP correctors, looking for formula, actually discourage voice. Students who draw on their own personal experience are penalized for not referring to the poem in the manner the corrector wishes. Surprise. Surprise. Susan Pimentel,longtime Standardisto and Student Achievement Partners Co-founder sat on the NAEP board.

    Her qualifications to make such important decisions about teaching and learning in public schools? A law degree from Cornell.

    David Coleman, of course, heightens such downplay-of-personal-experience strategy in his infamous admonition to teachers to make sure students learn "Nobody gives a shit what you think."

    Now we will have teachers across the country using formulaic lessons plans from the nobody- gives-a-shit-what-you-think Student Achievement Partners, financed by the nobody- gives-a-shit-what-you-think Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

    Common Core Template

    I stumbled across this Common Core Template and offer it as an example of the formula public school teachers face. Below you will see how I traced this fill-in-the-blank teaching strategy back to its origins and associates.
    Quick Reference Task Chart

    Argumentation Template Tasks
    Analysis Task 1

    After researching ________ (informational texts) on________ (content), write a/an ________ (essay or substitute)that argues your position on ________ (content). Support your position with evidence from your research. L2 Be sure to acknowledge competing views. L3 Give examples from past or current events or issues to illustrate and clarify your position.(Argumentation/Analysis)

    Task 2: [Insert question] After reading ________(literature or informational texts), write a/an ________(essay or substitute) that addresses the question and support your position with evidence from the text(s). L2 Be sure to acknowledge competing views. L3 Give examples from past or current events or issues to illustrate and clarify your position (Argumentation/Analysis)

    Comparison Task 3: After researching ________ (informational texts) on ________(content), write a/an _______(essay or substitute) that compares ________(content) and argues ________(content). Be sure to support your position with evidence from the texts. (Argumentation/Comparison)

    Task 4: [Insert question] After reading _______(literature or informational texts), write a/an _______(essay or substitute) that compares ________(content) and argues _______(content). Be sure to support your position with evidence from the texts. (Argumentation/Comparison)

    Evaluation Task 5: After researching ________ (informational texts) on________ (content), write a/an _______(essay or substitute) that discusses ________(content) and evaluates ________ (content). Be sure to support your position with evidence from your research (Argumentation/Evaluation)

    Task 6: [Insert question] After reading ________ (literature or informational texts), write a/an ________ (essay or substitute) that discusses ________ (content) and evaluates ________(content). Be sure to support your position with evidence from the texts. (Argumentation/Evaluation)
    Problem-Solution

    Task 7: After researching________ (informational texts) on________ (content), write a/an _______ (essay or substitute)that identifies a problem ________ (content) and argues for a solution. Support your position with evidence from your research.

    L2 Be sure to examine competing views. L3 Give examples from past or current events or issues to illustrate and clarify your position. (Argumentation/Problem-Solution)

    Task 8: [Insert question] After reading ________ (content), write a/an ________ (essay or substitute) that identifies a problem ________ (content) and argues for a solution ________ (content). Support your position with evidence from the text(s).

    L2 Be sure to examine competing views. L3 Give examples from past or current events or issues to illustrate and clarify your position. (Argumentation/Problem-Solution)

    Cause-Effect Task 9: After researching ________ (informational texts) on ________ (content), write a/an ________ (essay or substitute)that argues the causes of ________ (content) and explains the effects ________ (content). What ________ (conclusions or implications) can you draw? Support your discussion with evidence from the texts. (Argumentation/Cause-Effect)

    Task 10: [Insert question] After reading ______ (literature or informational texts) on _______(content), write a/an________ (essay or substitute) that argues the causes of ________ (content) and explains the effects ________ (content). What ________ (conclusions or implications) can you draw? Support your discussion with evidence
    Teacher Dan Brown thinks this is wonderful. Actually, he says it "blew him away."

    I have a different view. Borrowing David Coleman's scientific term, I call it shit. It comes from Literacy Design Collaborative. Look this collaborative up, and you'll find a long trail of grant recipients from the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. Here they are.

    Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation Grants for Literacy Design Collaborative

  • National Council of La Raza
    Date: October 2011
    Purpose: to coordinate the participation of 12 schools in training sessions facilitated by the Foundation as part of the Math Design Collaborative and Literacy Design Collaborative
    Amount: $538,967
    Good News of the Day: Put "Literacy Design" into 'search' at La Raza and you get 0 results.
  • National Literacy Project Inc.
    Date: October 2011
    Purpose: to engage with 3-5 districts in the Literacy Design Collaborative expansion in Florida
    Amount: $896,890
  • Rockcastle County School District
    Date: July 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I pilot
    Amount: $134,000
  • Boyle County Schools
    Date: July 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I pilot
    Amount: $86,000
    They list it as the Bill Gates Literacy Design Conference--and here is one slide from the Power Point presentation:

    Template Tasks/Teaching Tasks -- prompts with scoring rubrics

    Instructional Ladder -- outlines the skills to be built around the teaching task

    Instructional Modules -- small segments of study that focus on skills and information needed in order for students to complete the teaching tasks

    Common Core Literacy Standards built into templates

    All tasks tied to primary and secondary text sources (reading connection)
  • Lancaster-Lebanon Intermediate Unit 13
    Date: July 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I pilot
    Amount: $785,194
    Literacy Design and the Gifted Learner

    Lancaster L-I Receives National Recognition for Literacy Design
  • National Writing Project
    Date: July 2011
    Purpose: to help in increasing the capacity of local Writing Projects to provide schools and districts with high-quality professional development opportunities, aimed at implementing the Common Core State Standards in writing and the Literacy Design Collaborative system
    Amount: $2,645,593
    Responding to the Common Core: An Introduction to the Literacy Design Collaborative
  • Forsyth County Schools
    Date: June 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I pilot
    Amount: $250,000
    School-based Professional Learning Plan 2011-2012
  • Kenton County School District
    Date: June 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I pilot
    Amount: $300,000
    Identified Gates LDC Modules
  • Jessamine County Schools
    Date: June 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I
    Amount: $300,000
  • Hillsborough County Public Schools
    Date: June 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I pilot
    Amount: $420,632
    The 1.0 Guidebook to LDC
  • Fayette County Public Schools
    Date: June 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I pilot
    Amount: $479,000

  • Daviess County Public Schools
    Date: June 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I pilot
    Amount: $300,000
  • Boone County Schools
    Date: June 2011
    Purpose: to expand the implementation of Literacy Design Collaborative and Mathematics Design Collaborative tools in the district following the successful completion of the Phase I pilot
    Amount: $334,100
  • New Technology Network, LLC
    Date: December 2010
    Purpose: to build, customize, pilot, and validate modules and tasks as part of the Literacy Design Collaborative and Math Design Collaborative; and develop and pilot professional development supports and tools for teachers to help teachers teach effectively in a hybrid, blended or online school environment
    Amount: $2,112,080
  • Worcester Public Schools
    Date: July 2010
    Purpose: to participate in Literacy Design Collaborative and support related module development, teacher professional development, project coordination, and research and validation work
    Amount: $355,460
  • Charlotte-Mecklenburg Schools
    Date: June 2010
    Purpose: to develop Literacy Design Collaborative expert teachers and develop courses and models in middle school grades
    Amount: $214,808
    A View from the Inside: Teachers Perceptions and Use of the LDC Framework
  • Prichard Committee for Academic Excellence
    Date: June 2010
    Purpose: to develop Literacy Design Collaborative expert teachers, develop courses in Kenton County, and build Literacy Design Collaborative understanding in other districts
    Amount: $291,070
    A blog devoted to gushing over the Common Core

    Prichard also travels the country spreading the word. Here is a Colorado presentation.
  • Hillsborough County Public Schools
    Date: June 2010
    Purpose: to develop Literacy Design Collaborative expert teachers and develop middle school courses
    Amount: $354,993
  • Note: This is peanuts to Hillsborough. Here is a list of their grants from Gates:

    2011 Hillsborough County Public Schools College-Ready Education (U.S.) United States $838,253

    2011 Hillsborough County Public Schools College-Ready Education (U.S.) United States $420,632

    2010 Hillsborough County Public Schools College-Ready Education (U.S.) United States $354,993

    2009 Hillsborough County Public Schools College-Ready Education (U.S.) United States $100,000,000

    2009 Hillsborough County Public Schools College-Ready Education (U.S.) United States $2,502,146

    2006 Tampa-Hillsborough County Public Library Libraries United States $136,500



    Put "Hillsborough" and "Literacy Design" into a Google Search and the first item to pop up is an Education Week PowerPoint for its Webinar "Bringing Common Standards Into the Classroom, Aug. 30, 2011. Well, why not? Ed Week is a recipient of Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation largesse. The director of Hillsborough K-12 literacy was a participant.

    And if all the above isn't enough, take a look at
    Creating a Literacy Spine
    , featured on the Bill and Melinda Gates website:

    AGENDA

    Thursday, February 18, 2010
    7:00-8:00 a.m. Registration and Breakfast
    8:00-8:30 a.m. Welcome and Opening Remarks
    Carina Wong, Deputy Director, College Ready Work, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
    Presentation (PDF)

    8:30-9:30 a.m. Es el Momento: The Promise of Common Standards
    The college and career ready standards being spearheaded by the Council of Chief State School Officers and the National Governors Association present a radically different view of the literacy skills required for students to be college and career ready. What is so radically different about these standards?

    Presenter: David Coleman, Founder, Student Achievement Partners

    9:30-9:45 a.m. Now What: The Need for Literacy by Design
    Carina Wong, Deputy Director, College Ready Work, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

    9:45-10:00 a.m. Break

    10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m. Team Discussions: Implications of Literacy by Design
    Take a closer look at the Literacy by Design modules and ask specific questions of the Literacy by Design team. Join us for a facilitated discussion: How could the new common core standards and literacy spine play out in states and districts? What are the implications for state and district assessment practices? What policy changes will be necessary?

    Team Broadway: Districts from MA, PA, College Promise CMOs, LAUSD, PLAS
    Team Venice: Districts from FL, KY, NC
    Team Wilshire: All States
    Presentation (PPTX)[you have to access booklet--by Education Trust-- from Gates website]

    Brochure (PDF)
    12:00-1:00 p.m. Lunch--Connecting Literacy by Design to Effective Teaching
    John Deasy, Deputy Director, Empowering Effective Teachers, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

    1:00-2:30 p.m. What Does Next Generation Literacy Instruction Require?
    The implementation of college and career ready standards will require shifts in practice. What practices and conditions are central to the implementation of the standards and a literacy spine?

    Facilitator:
    Carina Wong, Deputy Director, College Ready Work, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

    Panelists:
    David Pearson, Dean and Professor, Graduate School of Education, University of California, Berkeley
    Presentation (PDF) [This is one page with 3 pictures--labelled Lifelong Literacy, Eyes on the Prize, and Grounded in the Disciplines. That's it.
    Marilyn Crawford, Founder, TimeWise
    Presentation (PPTX)
    Arielle Saturné, ICEF Public Schools, Graduate

    Presentation (PDF)
    Jack Stenner, Founder, MetaMetrics
    Presentation (PDF)
    2:30-2:45 p.m. Break
    2:45-4:15 p.m. Breakout

    Sessions: What Does Next Generation Literacy Instruction Require?

    Session I
    Seeds of Science/Roots of Reading: A Model of Distributed Literacy
    How can reading, writing, listening, and speaking be used as tools to support inquiry science? How do reading, writing, listening, and speaking benefit when they are embedded in an inquiry science setting? Literacy and science educators from the University of California, Berkeley's Graduate School of Education and Lawrence Hall of Science have built an effective model of science and literacy integration at the elementary level. Learn what this model of distributed literacy looks like, the principles that underlie the approach, evidence of its effectiveness for students, and lessons learned, as well as early plans for modifying this model for use at middle school.

    Presenters:
    David Pearson Dean and Professor, Graduate School of Education, University of California, Berkeley

    Jacqueline Barber, Associate Director of Lawrence Hall of Science, University of California, Berkeley
    Presentation (PDF)

    Session II
    The Artful Use of Infrastructure: Using Time and Resources Differently
    On the surface, designing a master schedule seems routine. Underneath the task, however, sits a complex and intertwined system of decision making that affects everything a school tries to do. The TimeWise Master Schedule Audit is an unprecedented effort to understand how resources are used as instructional strategy, starting with the classroom and building up to school and district viewpoints. This "inside-out" strategy of examining the master schedule for clues --using decisions about time, courses, staff and students as data-- has the potential to help districts make smarter resource allocation and policy decisions, and to help schools use resources efficiently and effectively for teaching and learning.

    Presenter: Marilyn Crawford, Founder, TimeWise Presentation (PPT)

    Session III
    Everything You Always Wanted to Know About Text Complexity
    The ability for students to read and understand complex text is essential to their success in college and the workplace, and text complexity is rightfully a centerpiece of the common core standards. However, there is little agreement in the assessment and publishing fields about how to go about measuring and sequencing levels of text complexity, and there is little understanding about what this looks like as teachers practice in the field. What should you know about text complexity and how are we thinking about it differently?

    Presenters:
    David Coleman, Founder, Student Achievement Partners
    Presentation (PDF)

    Jack Stenner, Founder, MetaMetrics
    Presentation (PDF)

    Session IV
    The Role of Assessment in Literacy by Design
    Learn more about the work the Center for Research on Evaluations, Standards, and Student Testing team at UCLA is doing to support the Literacy by Design assessment framework. How will we create an assessment blueprint for the Literacy by Design modules? Can we create a literacy score if we distribute the assessments across content areas? What are the challenges to creating a modular assessment system? How are we thinking about the latest scoring technology?

    Presenters:
    Eva Baker, Director, University of California, Los Angeles, CRESST

    Lisle Staley, Senior Researcher, University of California, Los Angeles, CRESST
    Presentation (PDF)

    5:30-7:30 p.m. Reception

    Friday, February 19
    6:45-7:30 a.m. breakfast

    7:30-9:30 a.m. What Will Disrupt Literacy Learning/Instruction as We Know it?
    What's possible? How can technology disrupt literacy teaching and learning as we know it? What are the current and next generation technology solutions to improve reading and writing learning opportunities for students and teachers?

    Facilitator: Larry Berger, CEO and Co-Founder, Wireless Generation

    Panelists: Akili Lee, Director, Digital Youth Network Presentation (PDF)
    Laurence Holt, Chief Product Officer and Executive Vice President, Wireless Generation
    Presentation (PDF)
    Katie Culp, Sr. Research Scientist, Education Development Center-Center for Children & Technology
    Presentation (PDF)
    Cathy Mincberg, Vice President and Chief Academic Officer, KC Distance Learning
    Presentation (PPTX) You can see it on YouTube
    No matter how checkered her career, she seems to land on her feet. As a board member in Houston she helped design Paige's rise to the top in Houston and then moved on to outrage parents in Portland. . . then moved on to private enterprise. There was a press release describing her performance at this event.

    9:30-9:45 a.m. Break

    9:45-11:15 a.m. Team Discussions: Playing it Out
    During this session, state and district/charter partners will have an opportunity to give us feedback on the strategies we've described and how they might organize themselves for implementation. How does the literacy spine link with your current work? What commitments are state and district partners willing to consider? What supports would be essential to actualize this work? What role should technology play?

    Team I: MA, PA
    Team II: FL, KY, NC
    Team III: College Promise CMOs, LAUSD, PLAS
    11:15-11:30 a.m. Break

    11:30 a.m.-12:00 p.m. Closing Remarks and Next Steps
    Carina Wong, Deputy Director, College Ready Work, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
    Don Shalvey, Deputy Director, State, District and Networks, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation
    7:30-11:15 a.m.* ICEF Visitation: View Park Preparatory Accelerated Charter Middle/High School

    ICEF Public School operates 15 high-performing charter schools in South Los Angeles serving over 4,000 students. ICEF's student population is 84% African American and 13% Latino; over 65% of students qualify for free or reduced lunch. 100% of ICEF graduates have been accepted to college; currently over 86% of the 2007 graduating class is still in college three years later. Returning alumni often state that their success is due in part to their preparation for the demands of college writing through the ICEF Writing Model. The ICEF Writing Model is a coherent 6-12 approach to preparing students for the analytical and argumentative writing they will encounter in college.
    Presenter: Melissa Kaplan, Director of Curriculum and Instruction, ICEF Public Schools

    If you have any breath--or heart--left after all that, here's one more item.

    Teacher To Do List

  • Ask your union and your professional organization what they are doing about the David Coleman assault.


  • Ask your union and your professional organization how they are supporting your work as a professional.


  • Although the National PTA has been bought off by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, contact local parent groups. Listen to them and they will listen to you.

  • Subscribe to this site and watch for op-eds you can send to your local media.
  • — Susan Ohanian

    May 03, 2012


    Index of Common Core [sic] Standards

Pages: 29   
[1] 2 3 4 5 6  Next >>    Last >>


FAIR USE NOTICE
This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of education issues vital to a democracy. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information click here. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.