PA - Common Core Alignment
Study and Updates
Adapted from Presentation of Preliminary Results of
Alignment Study Conducted by Dr. Suzanne Lane of
University of Pittsburgh in April, 2010 with the
addition of information relating to the release of the
final version of Common Core Standards
Jim Bohan
Lancaster – Lebanon IU 13
1
April Alignment Project Goals

Examine the content alignment and level of cognitive rigor of
Common Core standards with PA standards for math and
RWSL standards at grades 3, 5, 8, and 11

Provide independent analysis to inform the work of the Board,
policymakers and education stakeholders

Involve PA educators, including those who worked on the PA
standards, as well as faculty from the University
• Measurement expert
• Mathematics educators
• ELA educators
2
Methodology

Two 2-day meetings: Mathematics and ELA

Mathematics Panel

Group Leaders:
• Jim Bohan, Assessment Specialist & Math Consultant, LLIU 13
• Suzanne Lane, Professor, University of Pittsburgh

Panel:
• Math Project Director, Math and Science Collaborative, AIU 3
• Supervisor K-12 Curriculum/TAC and School Improvement Services,
Northwest Tri-County IU 5
• Curriculum Specialist/ Coach Mentor, CAIU 15
• Middle School Principal, Derry Township
• Middle School Teacher, East Penn School District
• High School Teacher, Camp Hill School District
• Math Supervisor & Assessment Coordinator, Phoenixville Area School District
• Associate Professor of Mathematics Education, University of Pittsburgh
• Associate Professor, Duquesne University
3
Methodology

Language Arts Panel

Group Leaders:
• Jean Dyszel, Consultant, Qualtiy Review Team for Standards Aligned System
• Suzanne Lane, Professor, University of Pittsburgh

Panel:
• Curriculum and Instruction Director for Literacy and ESL, LLIU 13
• Assistant Superintendent for Curriculum, Instruction and Assessment,
Boyerstown School District
• Reading Specialist, Northeastern School District
• HS Teacher and English Department Chair, Northside Urban Pathways Charter
School, Pittsburgh City School District
• Language Arts Advisor, PDE Language Education Advisor
• Language Arts Advisor, OCDEL (PDE) , Language Arts Advisor
• Teacher of 8th grade Communication Arts, Susquenita School District
• Assistant Professor of English Education, University of Pittsburgh
• Assistant Professor and Coordinator of Reading Education Program, University
of Pittsburgh
4
Methodology

Two groups:
Grades 3/5 group and Grades 8/11 group

Cognitive Rigor Rubric
• Level 1 – Recall
• Level 2 – Understanding Concept/Skill
• Level 3 – Strategic Thinking
• Level 4 – Extended Thinking

Content Alignment Rubric
• Alignment Very Strong
• Captures Essential Content (Moderate Alignment)
• Minimal Alignment
• No Alignment
5
Conclusions – Based on April 2010 versions
Math

For grades 3, 5, and 8, approximately 50% of PA math standards aligned to CC standards at
grade level (minimal to strong alignment)
• When including off-grades, a larger percentage of PA math standards aligned to CC
standards (minimal to strong alignment):
79% for grade 3, 87% for grade 5, and 63% for grade 8
• When including off-grades, a larger percentage of PA math standards aligned to CC
standards (moderate to strong alignment):
64% for grade 3, 70% for grade 5, and 50% for grade 8

For grade 11, 84% of PA math standards aligned to CC standards
• 61% alignment at the moderate level
ELA

For all grades, over 80% of the PA ELA standards aligned moderately or very strongly to CC
standards at grade level
• When including off-grades, over 87% of the PA ELA standards aligned moderately or
very strongly to CC standards
6
What about the Math Alignment?
Issues:



College and Career Readiness Standards
emphasize process and critical thinking – just like
the PA Math Standards – including the Standard
of Mathematical Practice
The CC K-12 Grade Level Standards (March,
2010) emphasize discrete skills.
Apparent disconnect of “Depth of Knowledge”
(Webb) and emphasis of the documents…
7
8
Disconnect in Number of Standards
Grade
PA Standards CC Standards
3
39
36
5
40
35
8
38
39
11
31
177
9
Results - Math
Cognitive Rigor for PA Math Standards vs. CC Math Standards
PA Standards
Standards
Common Core Standards
Grade / Cognitive
Rigor
3/ Recall
Concept/Skill
Strategic Thinking
10
23
6
26%
59%
15%
8
22
6
12%
61%
17%
5/ Recall
Concept/Skill
Strategic Thinking
9
26
5
23%
65%
13%
7
23
5
20%
66%
14%
8/ Recall
Concept/Skill
Strategic Thinking
9
23
6
24%
60%
16%
9
22
8
23%
56%
21%
11/ Recall
Concept/Skill
Strategic Thinking
Extended Thinking
4
20
6
1
13%
65%
19%
3%
70
96
11
0
40%
54%
6%
0%
10
But Since Then…



Writers of CC Standards received
over 10,000 suggestions.
PA and other states asked to see the
“process” in the K-12 Standards.
The Head of the Writing Team for
Math agreed and promised
changes….
11
And The Team Delivered!!!!
12
Consider the Clusters!
13
So Perhaps…
A better alignment strategy…
PA
Standards
↔
CC
Standards
Strands
↔
Domains
Standards
↔
Clusters
Anchors/
El. Cont.
↔
Standards
14
Next Steps

Full Alignment Study

Transition Plan

Adjustments
• SAS
• PSSA Exams
• Anchor Assignment
• Keystone Exams
15
Questions??????
16