Understanding &
Implementing Common Core Standards
Instructor Name: Dr.
Pamela Bernards, Ed.D.
Facilitator Name Professor Steven Dahl
Phone: 509-891-7219
Office Hours: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. PST Monday –
Friday
Email: steve_dahl@virtualeduc.com
Address: Virtual
Education Software
23403 E Mission Avenue, Suite 220F
Liberty Lake,
WA 99019
Technical Support: support@virtualeduc.com
Welcome to Understanding & Implementing Common Core
Standards, an interactive computer-based instruction course designed to
give you a deeper understanding of the rationale for and structure of this particular standards-based framework. In this course you will learn a number of factors that contributed to the overall design
of the Common Core Standards as well as practical pedagogical approaches that
will support practitioners working toward deeper implementation. We will reflect on the instructional “shifts”
emphasized throughout the Common Core Standards and contextualize the shifts
based on the diverse population of students course
participants serve. Understanding & Implementing Common Core Standards will also
provide connections to a variety of instructional considerations that will
support implementation regardless of educational context. Practitioners will be provided opportunities
to reflect on current practice and the degree to which they align with the
Common Core Standards as well as with colleagues across a wide range of
settings implementing these standards.
This
computer-based instruction course is a self-supporting program that provides
instruction, structured practice, and evaluation all on your home or school
computer. Technical support information
can be found in the Help section of your course.
Course Materials (Online)
Title: Understanding
& Implementing Common Core Standards
Instructor Name: Dr.
Pamela Bernards, Ed.D.
Facilitator Name Professor Steven Dahl, M.Ed.
Publisher: Virtual
Education Software, inc. 2014, Revised 2016, Revised 2019
Academic Work
Academic work submitted by
the individual (such as papers, assignments, reports, tests) shall be the
student’s own work or appropriately attributed, in part or in whole, to its
correct source. Submission of commercially prepared (or group prepared)
materials as if they are one’s own work is unacceptable.
Aiding Honesty in Others
The individual will encourage
honesty in others by refraining from providing materials or information to
another person with knowledge that these materials or information will be used
improperly.
Violations of
these academic standards will result in the assignment of a failing grade and
subsequent loss of credit for the course.
Level of Application
This course is designed for
anyone working to implement the Common Core State Standards with a diverse
learning population across the K-12 spectrum.
While the information presented may have relevance to any
student-centered educational setting, it will have the most relevance for K-12
mixed ability classrooms.
Expected
Learning Outcomes
As a result of this course, participants will
demonstrate their ability to:
This course, Understanding & Implementing Common Core
Standards, has been divided into four chapters. The organization of the course covers the
rationale for and design of the Common Core State Standards, the “Common Core
Mindset” practitioners need for successful implementation, and what specific
actions can be taken for deeper implementation across settings.
Chapter 1: Introduction
to the Shifts Resulting From CCSS Implementation
Chapter 2: Developing
a CCSS Mindset
Chapter 3: Common
Core Mindset in Action
Chapter 4: Thinking
Through the Core
In Chapter 2, we will move past the "what" of standards to
identify the underlying principles teachers need to understand when
implementing the CCSS. Teachers who take
time to re-examine their operating principles are in the best position to know
how well their approach aligns with what the authors of the CCSS had in mind
when developing the standards. This is
what is referred to in this course as developing the “CCSS Mindset.” Clarification will be made between “rigor”
and “difficulty” and the implications will be discussed for teachers as they
work to create equitable learning conditions. We will also articulate the difference between
a “fixed” and a “growth” orientation and the implications of each view for
students and teachers. A self-assessment
tool will be used so course participants can determine the priority level to
which course participants and their students believe that ability is
expandable. A seven-step process for
directly teaching students that ability is expandable is also provided.
In Chapter 3, the emphasis will be on designing accessible learning
conditions in partnership with students.
We do this in partnership with learners in ways that will accelerate
their growth toward college, career, and citizenship. The various ways in which student and teacher
self-efficacy are interconnected will be discussed. In light of these
interconnections, a four-step process for articulating standards and increasing
student ownership over learning outcomes will be outlined. Additionally, the purpose of and a process for
providing effective prescriptive feedback will be provided. As it pertains to the implementation of the
Common Core Standards, the significance of the emergence of educational
neuroscience and corollary strategies will be outlined. The importance of explicitly teaching academic
language and methods for increasing student ownership of learning across
settings will also be outlined. Participants
will be supported to think through how they will approach students who struggle
when implementing the Common Core Standards and the role of differentiation.
In Chapter 4, we will further explore how implementation of the Common
Core Standards is aimed at deepening student comprehension and higher order
thinking skills. The difference between
a teaching strategy and a learning strategy will be discussed in conjunction
with a particular implementation strategy, compare and
contrast. Specific web-based tools for
designing engaging learning activities using primary source documents and for
engaging students in higher order thinking skills will be provided. The importance of student use of reasoning and
argument in writing across the CCSS is addressed. Course participants will be provided a tool
for further reflection on their own implementation of the standards and support
in planning for any changes identified through reflection.
Each chapter contains
additional handouts that cover specific topics from the chapter in greater
depth. They are provided for you to
read, ponder, and apply to the setting in which you work. Some of the handouts are directly related to
the concepts and content of the specific chapter, but also included are
handouts indirectly related to provide extended learning connections.
As
a student you will be expected to:
·
Complete all four
information sections showing a competent understanding of the material
presented in each section.
·
Complete all four section
examinations, showing a competent understanding of the material presented. You must obtain an overall score of 70% or higher, with no individual exam score below 50%, to pass this course. *Please
note: Minimum exam score requirements may vary by college or university;
therefore, you should refer to your course addendum to determine what your
minimum exam score requirements are.
·
Complete a review of any section on which your examination score was
below 50%.
·
Retake any examination, after completing an
information review, to increase that examination score to a minimum of 50%, making
sure to also be achieving an overall exam score of a minimum 70% (maximum of
three attempts). *Please note: Minimum exam score
requirements may vary by college or university; therefore, you should refer to
your course addendum to determine what your minimum exam score requirements
are.
·
Complete a course evaluation form at the end of the course.
Examinations
At the end of each chapter, you will be
expected to complete an examination designed to assess your knowledge. You may
take these exams a total of three times. Your last score will save, not the
highest score. After your third attempt,
each examination will lock and not allow further access. Your final grade for the course will be
determined by calculating an average score of all exams. This score will be printed on your final
certificate. As this is a self-paced
computerized instruction program, you may review course information as often as
necessary. You will not be able to exit any examinations until you have
answered all questions. If you try to exit the exam before you complete all
questions, your information will be lost. You are expected to complete the
entire exam in one sitting.
Understanding & Implementing Common Core Standards has been developed with the widest possible audience
in mind because the core principles and practices of implementation need to be
applied across K-12 settings. The
primary goal of the course is to provide the rationale for the Common Core
Standards (the why) and what research-based pedagogical approaches will help
practitioners implement these standards in their unique context. The course acknowledges that practitioners are
at varying stages of implementing these standards, so opportunities for self-reflection,
learning about cross-cutting implementation strategies, and action planning are
based on each course participant’s current practice and context.
Steve Dahl, the instructor of
record, has served as a district-level administrator overseeing a variety of
federal programs, such as Special Education, English Language Learning (ELL),
and Title 1, for over 10 years. He
currently serves as a school administrator overseeing programs for students who
are provided academic and social emotional learning opportunities in very
restrictive settings, including regional juvenile justice facilities. He has a master’s degree in Special Education
and has completed post-master’s coursework to obtain a Washington State
Administrator Credential, which certifies him to oversee programs ranging from
preschool settings through 12th grade (as well as post-secondary
vocational programs for 18–21-year-old students). He has 22 years of combined experience in
resource-room special education classrooms, inclusion support in a
comprehensive high school, and provision of support to adults with disabilities
in accessing a wide range of in-school and community learning
opportunities. Please
contact Professor Dahl if you have course content or examination questions.
Pamela Bernards
has 30 years of combined experience in diverse PK–8 and high school settings as
a teacher and an administrator. In
addition to these responsibilities, she was the founding director of a K-8
after-school care program and founder of a pre-school program for infants to
4-year-olds. As a principal, her school was named a U.S. Department of
Education Blue Ribbon School of Excellence in 1992, as was the school at which
she served as curriculum coordinator in 2010. She currently serves as a
principal in a PK3–Grade 8 school. Areas of interest include curriculum,
research-based teaching practices, staff development, assessment, data-driven
instruction, and instructional intervention (remediation and gifted/talented).
She received a doctorate in Leadership and Professional Practice from Trevecca
Nazarene University. Please contact Professor Dahl if you have
course content or examination questions.
You
may contact the facilitator by emailing Professor Dahl at steve_dahl@virtualeduc.com or
calling him at 509-891-7219, Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. PST.
Phone messages will be answered within 24 hours. Phone conferences will be limited to ten minutes per student, per
day, given that this is a self-paced instructional program. Please do not
contact the instructor about technical problems, course glitches, or other
issues that involve the operation of the course.
Technical Questions
If you
have questions or problems related to the operation of this course, please try
everything twice. If the problem persists please check our support pages for
FAQs and known issues at www.virtualeduc.com
and also the Help section of your course.
If you
need personal assistance then email support@virtualeduc.com or call (509)
891-7219. When contacting technical
support, please know your course version number (it is located at the bottom
left side of the Welcome Screen) and your operating system,
and be seated in front of the computer at the time of your call.
Minimum Computer Requirements
Please refer to VESi’s
website: www.virtualeduc.com or
contact VESi if you have further questions about the compatibility of your
operating system.
Refer to the addendum
regarding Grading Criteria, Course Completion Information, Items to be
Submitted and how to submit your completed information. The addendum will also
note any additional course assignments that you may be required to complete
that are not listed in this syllabus.
Bibliography (Suggested
Readings)
Abadie, M., & Bista, K. (2018). Understanding
the stages of concerns: Implementation of the Common Core State Standards in
Louisiana schools. Journal of
School Administration Research and Development, 3(1), 57–66. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1190934.pdf
Achieve the Core: Resources developed by Student
Achievement Partners. Free, ready-to-use
classroom resources designed to help
educators understand and implement the Common Core and other college and career
ready standards. http://achievethecore.org/
Aligned.
Recognize Alignment: Deepen your knowledge of the Shifts and Standards and
learn what to look for in aligned materials. Retireved on 9/7/19 from: .https://achievethecore.org/aligned/
Coherence Map for Common
Core State Standards in Mathematics: http://achievethecore.org/page/1118/coherence-map
Deep Dive Into the Math
Shifts: http://achievethecore.org/page/400/deep-dive-into-the-math-shifts
Instructional Practice
Toolkit and Classroom Videos: The Instructional Practice Toolkit is designed
for use by teachers and those who support teachers to build understanding and
experience with instruction aligned to College and Career Readiness (CCR)
standards in mathematics and ELA/literacy. http://achievethecore.org/category/1193/instructional-practice-toolkit-and-classroom-videos
Lesson Planning Resources:
Rather than focusing exclusively on literacy skills, the Common Core State
Standards set expectations for the complexity of texts students need to be able
to read to be ready for college and careers. This collection includes tools to
help with each step and research to support teachers' understanding of text
complexity. To plan a close-reading lesson with text complexity in mind, use
the Lesson Planning Tool. http://achievethecore.org/lesson-planning-tool/
Progressions Documents for
the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics: http://achievethecore.org/page/254/progressions-documents-for-the-common-core-state-standards-for-mathematics
Understand How CCSS Aligned
Assessment is Different: All of the mini-assessments
presented are designed to highlight the math Shifts of Focus, Coherence, and
Rigor. The resources below explain what each of the Shifts look like in
CCSS-aligned assessment. Learn more about the math Shifts. http://achievethecore.org/page/2732/understand-how-ccss-aligned-assessment-is-different
Understand the Common Core
State Standards Shifts in Mathematics: http://achievethecore.org/page/900/the-common-core-state-standards-shifts-in-mathematics
Understand the Mathematics
Tasks: http://achievethecore.org/page/2738/understand-the-mathematics-tasks
Understanding the Shifts: http://achievethecore.org/category/419/the-shifts
Akkus, M. (2016). The Common Core State Standards
for mathematics. International Journal of
Research in Education and Science (IJRES), 2(1), 49–54.
doi:10.21890/ijres.61754
American
Federation of Teachers (2016). A
teacher’s guide to the Common Core: A resource guide for success in English
language arts for teachers who work with English learners and students with
disabilities. Retrieved from http://achievethecore.org/page/2892/a-teacher-s-guide-to-the-common-core-a-resource-guide-for-success-in-english-language-arts-for-teachers-who-work-with-english-learners-and-students-with-disabilities
Bloom,
B. (1956). Taxonomy of educational
objectives: Handbook 1. New York, NY: David McKay.
Brookhart,
S. (2010). How to assess higher-order
thinking skills in your classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Brophy, J. (1998, May). Failure syndrome students. Retrieved on 9/7/19 from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED419625.pdf
California’s Department of Education. (n.d.). Resilience—Strengthening protective factors and developmental assets. Retrieved on 9/7/19 from: https://www.cde.ca.gov/ls/yd/re/
Center
for Applied Special Technology (CAST). http://www.cast.org/
CEEDAR Center. Collaboration for
Effective Educator Development, Accountability and Reform (CEEDAR).
Retrieved on 9/7/19 from: https://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/
Center
for Parent Information and Resources. Resources on the Every
Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) in parent-friendly language. https://www.parentcenterhub.org/essa-reauth/
Common Core State Standards
National
Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School
Officers. Common Core State Standards.
Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices,
Council of Chief State School Officers.
Myths
vs. Facts: http://www.corestandards.org/about-the-standards/myths-vs-facts/
Read
the ELA Standards: The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts
& Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects (“the
standards”) represent the next generation of K–12 standards designed to prepare
all students for success in college, career, and life by the time they graduate
from high school. http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy/
Read
the Mathematics Standards: http://www.corestandards.org/Math/
Read
the Standards: http://www.corestandards.org/read-the-standards/
Standards
in Your State: http://www.corestandards.org/standards-in-your-state/
What
Parents Should Know: http://www.corestandards.org/what-parents-should-know/
Common
Core State Standards Appendix A: http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Appendix_A.pdf
CCSSO General Resources
A beginners guide to text complexity. Retrieved on 9/7/19 from: https://www.generationready.com/a-beginners-guide-to-text-complexity/
Navigating
Text Complexity. Retrieved on 9/7/19 from: http://navigatingtextcomplexity.kaulfussec.com/
New Research on Text Complexity: Supplemental
Information for Appendix A of the Common Core State Standards for English
Language Arts and Literacy: New Research on Text Complexity (2017). http://www.corestandards.org/assets/E0813_Appendix_A_New_Research_on_Text_Complexity.pdf
Science SCASS States. Using Crosscutting Concepts to Prompt Student
Responses. CCSSO Science SCASS Committee on Classroom Assessment. Retrieved
from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED586953.pdf
Teaching to the Core. Retrieved on 9/7/19 from: https://ccsso.org/resource-library/teaching-core
Data
Wise Project. Harvard University. https://datawise.gse.harvard.edu/
Differentiation
Central provided by the Institutes on Academic Diversity. Curry School of
Education, University of Virginia. http://differentiationcentral.com/model/
Dweck,
C. (2010). Even geniuses work hard. Educational
Leadership, 68(1), 16–20. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Ecker, A. (2016). Evidence-based practices for
teachers: A synthesis of trustworthy online resources. Insights into Learning Disabilities, 13(1), 19–37.
EngageNY.
(New York State Common Core State Standards). https://www.engageny.org/common-core-curriculum
Every
Student Succeeds Act. (2015). https://www.ed.gov/essa
Fisher,
D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2012). Text
complexity: Raising rigor in reading. Newark, DE: International Reading.
Francis,
E. (2016). Now that’s a good question!
How to promote cognitive rigor through classroom questioning. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
Frizell,
M., & Dunderdale, T. (2015). A compendium of research on the Common Core
State Standards. Center for Education
Policy.
This updated compendium
includes over 85 research studies focused on the Common Core State Standards
and encompasses research from multiple sources, such as government entities,
independent organizations, and peer-reviewed publications from academic
journals and other outlets. Each study in the compendium has been summarized
and categorized across nine topic areas. A URL link to the original research is
also provided when possible. The compendium is presented below both as a single
document and as individual PDFs of the nine topic areas. The compendium will be
updated regularly as the body of CCSS-related research grows. This latest
version was updated as of February 10, 2015. https://www.cep-dc.org/displayDocument.cfm?DocumentID=438
Goleman,
D. (2005). Emotional intelligence: Why it
can matter more than IQ. New York, NY: Bantam.
Goleman,
D. (2007). Social intelligence: The new
science of human relationships. New York, NY: Bantam.
Hamilton,
L. S., Kaufman, J. H., Stecher, B. M., Naftel, S., Robbins, M., Thompson, L.
E., . . . Opfer, V. D. (2016). What
supports do teachers need to help students meet Common Core State Standards for
mathematics? Findings from the American teacher and American school leader
panels. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1404-1.html
Hattie,
J. (2015). The applicability of Visible Learning to higher education. Scholarship of Teaching and Learning in
Psychology, 1(1), 79–91. doi:10.1037/stl0000021
Hattie,
J., Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2016). Visible
learning for literacy. Retrieved from https://visible-learning.org/2016/03/visible-learning-for-literacy-hattie/
Hillocks,
G. (2011). Teaching argument writing.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Hull, T.
H., Miles, R. E. H., & Balkan, D. S. (2012). The Common Core mathematics practices: Transforming practices through
team leadership. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Institutes
of Educational Sciences (IES). Assisting
students struggling with mathematics: Response to Intervention (RtI) for
elementary and middle schools. Retrieved from https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/practiceguide/2
International Reading Association
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Committee. (2012). Literacy
implementation guidance for the ELA Common Core State Standards [White
paper]. Retrieved 9-6-19 from : https://www.literacyworldwide.org/docs/default-source/where-we-stand/ela-common-core-state-standards-guidance.pdf?sfvrsn=b1a4af8e_8
International Literacy Association (ILA). A global advocacy and membership
organization that transforms lives through literacy across 75 countries.
https://www.literacyworldwide.org/
Jennings, J. (2012). Why have we fallen short and
where do we go from here? Center for
Educational Policy. Retrieved from http://www.cep-dc.org/displayDocument.cfm?DocumentID=392
Jensen,
E. (2008). Brain-based learning: The new
paradigm of teaching. San Francisco, CA: Corwin.
Johnson, T., & Wells, L. (2017).
English language learner teacher effectiveness and the Common Core. Education Policy
Analysis Archives, 25(23). Retrieved on 9-6-19 from: https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1137865.pdf
Kaufman,
J. H., Opfer, V. D, Bongard, M., & Pane, J. D (2018). Changes in what teachers know and do in the Common Core era: American
teacher panel findings from 2015 to 2017. Santa Monica, CA: RAND
Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR2658.html
Kaufman,
J. H., Hamilton, L. S., Stecher, B. M., Naftel, S., Robbins, M., Thompson, L.
E., . . . Opfer, V. D. (2016). What
supports do teachers need to help students meet Common Core State Standards for
English language arts and literacy? Findings from the American teacher and
American school leader panels. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation. https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RR1374-1.html
Kegan,
R., & Lahey, L. (2009). Immunities to
change. Boston, MA: Harvard Business Press.
Lee, J.,
& Wu, Y. (2017). Is the Common Core racing America to the top? Tracking
changes in state standards, school practices, and student achievement. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 25(35). http://dx.doi.org/10.14507/epaa.25.2834
Letwinsky,
K., & Cavender, M. (2018). Shifting
preservice teachers’ beliefs and understandings to support pedagogical change
in mathematics. International Journal of Research in Education
and Science, 4(1), 106–120.
Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1169843.pdf
What
Works Clearinghouse, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of
Education. (2018, February). Teacher
Training, Evaluation, and Compensation intervention report: National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards Certification. Retrieved from https://whatworks.ed.gov
Marchitello,
M., & Wilhelm, M. (2014). The cognitive science behind the Common Core.
Washington, DC: Center for American Progress. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED561076
Marzano,
R. (2003). What works in schools:
Translating research into action.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Marzano,
R. (2007). The art and science of
teaching: A comprehensive framework for effective teaching. Alexandria, VA:
ASCD.
Marzano,
R., Pickering, D., & Heflebower, T. (2011). The highly engaged classroom. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Medina,
J. (2008) Brain rules. Seattle, WA:
Pear Press.
McCray,
E.D., Kamman, M., Brownell, M., & Robinson, S. (2017). High-leverage practices and
evidence-based practices: A promising pair. University
of Florida, Collaboration for Effective Educator Development, Accountability,
and Reform Center. http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/portfolio/high-leverage-practices-and-evidence-based-practices-a-promising-pair/
McLeskey,
J., Barringer, M-D., Billingsley, B., Brownell, M., Jackson, D., Kennedy, M.,
. . . Ziegler, D. (2017, January). High-leverage practices in
special education. Arlington, VA: Council for Exceptional Children & CEEDAR
Center. http://ceedar.education.ufl.edu/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/CEC-HLP-Web.pdf
Moss,
C., & Brookhart, S. (2012). Learning
targets: Helping students aim for understanding in today’s lesson. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
National
Association for the Education of Young Children. (2015). Developmentally
appropriate practice and the Common Core State Standards: Framing the issues.
Research brief. Retrieved from https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-shared/downloads/PDFs/resources/topics/15_developmentally_appropriate_practice_and_the_common_core_state_standards.pdf
National
Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Accessible Educational Materials
for K-12 Educators. http://aem.cast.org/about/quick-start-educators.html#.XDAF3VxKjIU
National
Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Access to the general curriculum for students with disabilities: A brief
legal interpretation. http://aem.cast.org/about/publications/2003/ncac-curriculum-access-legal-interpretation.html#.XDALdlxKjIU
National
Center on Intensive Intervention. https://charts.intensiveintervention.org/chart/instructional-intervention-tools
National
Center on Intensive Intervention. Reading Comprehension Resources. https://intensiveintervention.org/sites/default/files/ReadCompExample_508.pdf
Oberman,
M., & Boudett, K. P. Eight steps to becoming datawise. Educational Leadership, 73(3).
Retrieved from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov15/vol73/num03/Eight-Steps-to-Becoming-Data-Wise.aspx
Oregon
Department of Education. (n.d.). Apply
the concepts. Retrieved from http://oregonliteracypd.uoregon.edu/topic/academic-language
Partnership
for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PAARC). http://parcc-assessment.org/
Robinson,
K. (2011). Out of our minds: Learning to
be creative. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons.
Reeves,
D. (2010). Transforming professional
development into student results. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Reeves,
D., Wiggs, M., Lassiter, C., Piercy, T., Ventura, S., & Bell, B. (2011). Navigating implementation of the Common Core
State Standards. Engelwood, CO: Lead and Learn Press.
Schlechty,
P. (2011). Engaging students: The next
level of working on the work. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Schmoker,
M. (2011). Focus: Elevating the
essentials to radically improve student learning. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Silver,
H., Dewing, R., & Perini, M. (2012). The
core six: Essential strategies for achieving excellence with the Common Core.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Smarter
Balanced Assessment Consortium: http://www.smarterbalanced.org/about/
Stiggins, R., & Chappuis, J.
(2008, January). Enhancing student learning. Retrieved on
9/7/19 from: http://downloads.pearsonassessments.com/ati/downloads/enhancingstudent_dadmn01-08.pdf
Resources
for Educators: http://www.smarterbalanced.org/educators/
Sousa,
D. (2010). Mind, brain, and education:
Neuroscience implications for the classroom. Bloomington, IN: Solution
Tree.
Sousa,
D. A., & Tomlinson, C. A. (2011). Differentiation
and the brain: How neuroscience supports the
learner-friendly classroom. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Stiggins,
R., & Chappuis, J. (2008, January).
Enhancing student learning. Retrieved from http://dr078.k12.sd.us/Library/PLC%20Resources/Enhancing%20Student%20Learning%20Through%20Formative%20Assessment.pdf
Swinney,
R., & Velasco, P. (2011). Connecting
content and academic language for English learners and struggling students
grades 2–6. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Tomlinson,
C., & Imbeau, M. (2014). A
differentiated approach to the Common Core: How do I
help a broad range of learners succeed with challenging curriculum?
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
U.S.
Department of Education, Every Student Succeeds Act. Link to resources: https://www.ed.gov/essa
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers
for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). School
connectedness. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/protective/connectedness.htm
U.S.
Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences. TIMSS 2007 results. National Center for Trends in International
Math and Science Study (TIMSS). Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/timss/results07.asp
University
of Oregon’s Brain Development Lab. (2008). Changing
brains: Effects of experience on human brain development [DVD]. Available
from www.changingbrains.org
Webb, N.
(2002) Depth of knowledge (DOK) levels in
4 content areas. Retrieved from http://facstaff.wcer.wisc.edu/normw/state%20alignment%20page%20one.htm
Wiliam,
D. (2011). Embedded formative assessment.
Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Willis,
J. (2006). Research-based strategies to
ignite student learning: Insights from a neurologist and classroom teacher. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
Wormelli,
M. (2006). Fair isn’t always equal:
Assessing and grading in the differentiated classroom. Portland, ME:
Stenhouse.
Zinski,
C., & Rea, D. (2016). The Every Student Succeeds
Act (ESSA): What it means for educators of students at risk. National Youth At-Risk Journal, 2(1). doi:10.20429/nyarj.2016.020101
Zwiers,
J., & Crawford, M. (2011). Academic conversations: Classroom talk that
fosters critical thinking and content understandings. Portland, ME:
Stenhouse.
Course content is updated every three
years. Due to this update timeline, some
URL links may no longer be active or may have changed. Please type the title of the organization
into the command line of any Internet browser search window and you will be
able to find whether the URL link is still active or any new link to the
corresponding organization’s web home page.
9/9/19
jn