First in a series

This blog’s title may sound puzzling, but it’s true. If you teach any subject to any age student, the Common Core State Standards for Mathematical Practice (SMP) comprise a gold mine of teaching ideas for you.  With this blog I am beginning a series in which you and I can exchange thoughts about this very special set of 8 standards.

Are you asking how they can be so great for you if you don’t teach math? The answer lies in my use of the phrase, gold mine. As we explore these standards, some ideas will be on the surface, readily apparent to everyone reading this, no matter what you teach. Sometimes we’ll dig a little to find ideas that transfer well to any subject.

There are two groups of mathematical standards in the Common Core State Standards. One group (a) has regular standards that relate to grade level content for elementary and middle school or course/conceptual category content for high school, such as measurement and data, algebra, etc. The second group (b) is the one we are examining in this blog. 

Unlike the (a) group whose standards apply to specific grades or courses, the (b) group moves across all grade level and course boundaries from kindergarten to 12th grade and applies equally to all. Collectively, they describe the college and career ready mathematically proficient student. Specifically, they describe what this student does, i.e., how he looks when functioning mathematically.  Here is where our creativity kicks in.

As a non-math teacher, you might use these standards as springboards to creative, personalized expressions of student performance within your subject area. (If you print or post any semblance to the SMP’s anyplace, be sure to give appropriate credit by footnoting your work with something like – original source Common Core State Standards) Continue reading »

To hear some teachers talk you'd think they were running covert operations in their classrooms. They go to extreme lengths to keep the content of their tests in Top Secret status and practically go undercover to seek out would-be cheaters on test day. But, with the arrival of the Common Core State Standards it is time to reconsider a method of operating that is more about the culture of school than a best practice for teaching.

"It should be clear to every student, parent and teacher what the standards of success are in every school" (corestandards.org/the-standards).

If students are truly informed about exactly what they are supposed to be learning, then how is it even possible for test content to be a mystery?

I know a teacher who bragged about his tough tests. He loved to generate test questions from obscure locations like footnotes and picture captions. He cackled gleefully as he posted students' scores on a bell curve and then dramatically hacked the curve into sections that would correspond to letter grades. His motivation for testing was to divide the class into winners and losers.

There are still times when it is necessary to rank students. For example, any time students are seeking admission to a program a ranking test will be necessary to decide who gets in and who does not. In the right context these tests are both appropriate and meaningful to their task.

The average classroom assessment, however, is not a ranking test. Instead, the purpose of classroom assessments is to measure the degree to which students have mastered a stated set of skills or concepts. Those skills and concepts are clearly stated in the Common Core State Standards at corestandards.org. One purpose for a common set of academic standards is so that every student and parent can know what students will be learning in school. Pssst…the cat's out of the bag, everyone already knows what's on the test. Continue reading »

When I first began to examine the Common Core State Standards (CCSS), I was thrilled to see that an entire section was dedicated to literacy. During my elementary education undergraduate study, as an English major I had accepted the idea that reading and writing reigned in the realm of language arts classes and traveled across the curriculum only as silent tools, present but seldom addressed. But now, in the CCSS Literacy Standards, suddenly literacy steps up front and center in every subject area. Literacy standard titles indicate the breadth of their applicability. (To see their full text, click the link below and go to pages 61-64.)

Reading for literacy in history/social studies, Grades 6-12
Reading for literacy in science and technical subjects, Grades 6-12
Writing for literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects

In earlier blogs, I’ve alluded to both the excitement and trepidation that these literacy standards may generate. Teachers of all kinds might catch a new vision of cross-curricular collaboration through shared standard language, but non-language arts teachers might also experience anxiety as they wonder how to take reading and writing to a new level in their specific subject content.

In order to consider how the CCSS literacy standards might infiltrate diverse subject areas, we need to first understand the CCSS anchor standards. One might say that the CCSS language arts structure begins with anchor standards. There are ten reading anchors and ten writing anchors. Each of the ten reading anchors sprouts one grade level version for every grade from kindergarten through 8th grade, and grade-span versions for 9-10 and 11-12. The same is true in writing. Continue reading »

In my two most recent blogs, I envisaged the excitement and apprehension that teachers of all subject areas will probably experience due to the new Common Core State Standards (CCSS) literacy block.

(To view these standards, follow the link below, and go to pages 61-64.)

Reading for literacy in history/social studies, Grades 6-12
Reading for literacy in science and technical subjects, Grades 6-12
Writing for literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects

As you can tell by their three titles, CCSS literacy standards ask science, technical subject, history, and social studies teachers to show students how to skillfully activate reading and writing during their study of subject area content. Given their focus on reading and writing, these standards are especially exciting, because they establish common language and common objectives among diverse subject area teachers. Opportunities for teachers to collaborate across the entire curriculum abound.

However, these same literacy standards might also cause trepidation, since they swivel the spotlight to reading and writing in all subject areas. Now, for example, science teachers are expected to incorporate not just science standards, but also literacy standards into their planning and teaching. Continue reading »

In my last blog, Common Core State Standards Emphasize Literacy in All Subject Areas, I commended the usefulness of the new Common Core State Standard (CCSS) literacy block. Collectively, these reading-and-writing-in-subject-area-standards define college and career readiness performance skills in three broad realms:

Reading for literacy in history/social studies, Grades 6-12

Reading for literacy in science and technical subjects, Grades 6-12

Writing for literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects, Grades 6-12

As I suggested in my earlier blog, while our 2011-12 orientation to the CCSS rolls out and we consider how to apply reading and writing standards per distinct content areas, we will most likely engage in lively, collaborative exchanges among language arts and other subject teachers. Language arts specialists will be able to lend expert advice to subject area teachers, but those teachers will illuminate unique literacy needs in their specific subject content. Although we can anticipate enjoyable discourse, we should also prepare for challenges that lie ahead. As we go through this orientation process, let’s be realistic about literacy standards. We needn’t dread new literacy demands, but we do need to take a good look and thoughtfully plan for success. Continue reading »