2 From NECAP to the Common Core and New Assessments English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects Fall 2010,

1

From NECAP to the Common Core and New Assessments

English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and

Technical Subjects

Fall 2010, C.Felix

Common Core State Standards

We will be able to measure knowledge and skills against a common set of college and career ready standards.

Fall 2010, C.Felix 2

3

NH’s Role & Influence in CCSS

Design & Development Text complexity, format, informational

text, across content areas

Review and Feedback NH provided specific feedback multiple

times Writing teams were responsive to us

Fall 2010, C.Felix

4

Implications & Impact in NH

Adoption State Board adopted the CCSS “in principle” and is

committed to a thoughtful, orderly transition process for implementation and assessment

Alignment Process began this summer to look at gaps and

matches and grade differentials DOE putting together a broad view to post &

distribute Implementation

NECAP in place for at least three years

Fall 2010, C.Felix

5

Literacy is not just for ELA teachers! The Common Core includes an integrated model across content areas.

Brings a focus back to speaking & listening

Technology and digital media woven throughout all areas – Viewing

Key Features of the Common Core

Fall 2010, C.Felix

Key Features of the Common Core

Format has some similarities with NECAP.

Separate standards for literary and informational text

Landscape, three grades on a page

6Fall 2010, C.Felix

Key Features of the Common Core

• Uses NAEP framework for percentage of focus, e.g., literary versus informational texts.

• Anchor standards go across grades, i.e., they are the same for all grades

Fall 2010, C.Felix 7

Key Differences

Strong emphasis on technology and media woven throughout literacy standards

Some grade differentials, especially at the lower grades

One standard may include both inference and literal understanding

8Fall 2010, C.Felix

Key differences

Although most of the Common Core standards align to NECAP, often they are not identical matches.

Example: 6 Language Anchor standards, 2-3 deal with conventions (and are very specific) while 3-4 are about vocabulary.

9Fall 2010, C.Felix

Main Sections

K-5, cross content standards 6-12 Standards for English

Language Arts 6-12 Standards for Literacy in

History/ Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects

Appendix, A, B, and C

10Fall 2010, C.Felix

Reading

Fall 2010, C.Felix 11

Literary Informational

Grade 4 50% 50%

Grade 8 45% 55%

Grade 11 30% 70%

Writing

Grade To Persuade To Explain To Convey Experience

4 30% 35% 35%

8 35% 35% 30%

12 40% 40% 20%

Fall 2010, C.Felix 12

College and Career Ready Anchor Standards

10 for Reading 10 for Writing 6 for Language 6 for Speaking and Listening

Turn to p. 10 in binder, then to p. 35

13Fall 2010, C.Felix

Reading Anchor Standard 1

Key Ideas and Details1. Read closely to determine what the

text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from text.

14Fall 2010, C.Felix

Reading Standard 1: Literature & Informational

R.L.1 Cite textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.

R.I.1 Cite strong and thorough textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text.

15Fall 2010, C.Felix

Alignment of a Reading Standard

CC.6.R.L.1 Key Ideas and Details: Cite textual evidence to support analysis of what the text says explicitly as well as inferences drawn from the text. 

(Page 36)

NH.6.R.LT.1.1 NH.6.R.LT.2.2 NH.6.R.LT.2.3 NH.6.R.LT.2.1 NH.6.R.LT.4.2

16Fall 2010, C.Felix

Alignment of Reading standard

CC.6.R.I.6 Determine an author’s point of view or purpose in a text and explain how it is conveyed in the text. P. 39

NH.6.R.IT.2.3 Analyze and interpret informational text, citing evidence as appropriate by: Drawing inferences about text, including author's purpose (State)

17Fall 2010, C.Felix