ADEs Initial Observations and Feedback on the draft documents of TUSDs Multicultural High School Courses June 2013

On May 23, 2013, TUSD submitted to ADE drafts of nine high school multicultural courses for review. In the limited time available, ADE staff has completed an initial overview review of the eight grade 11 and 12 courses and is in the midst of a more detailed review of the three grade 11 US History courses, the three grade 12 US Government courses and the grade 11 and grade 12 English courses. Due to the limited timeframe, we have not yet reviewed the grade 9 Culture, Identity and Transformation course as we understand it is not being considered for the upcoming 2013-2014 school year schedule. ADEs review is anchored in the following primary understandings: These courses will provide core content credit to meet the graduation requirements established by the Arizona State Board of Education The multicultural history and government courses must be fully aligned to the Arizona K-12 Social Studies Standard and to the Arizona Common Core Standards English Language Arts Literacy in History/Social Studies as per state statute (A.R.S. 15-701.01(C)) The multicultural English courses must be fully aligned to the Arizona Common Core Standards English Language Arts as per state statute (A.R.S. 15-701.01(C)) These courses must meet the requirements of A.R.S. 15-112 These courses must meet the requirements of the Unitary Status Plan, February 2013

ADE recognizes the volume of work that has been done in a relatively short period of time and appreciates the opportunity to provide feedback on the draft documents. While responsibility of adopting articulated rigorous academic standards resides with the Arizona State Board of Education, local education agencies have the responsibility of designing aligned curriculum that effectively connects the state academic standards to the students in their schools in a meaningful way. Needless to say, this work is complex, multi-faceted and challenging. An approach that includes a diverse team of educational curriculum experts, informed reflective dialogue, transparency and stakeholder input is conducive to the development of a rigorous, aligned course of study that meets the learning needs of all students.

Arizona Social Studies and ELA History/Social Studies Literacy Standards Expectations
The Arizona Social Studies Standard requires students attain knowledge of essential facts, concepts, people, and events as well as a firm grasp of reasoning, inquiry and research skills. Students must learn how to frame and test hypotheses, distinguish logical and illogical reasoning; develop informed opinions based on different points of view and employ reflective thinking and evaluation. The goal of the civics strand is to develop the requisite knowledge and skills for informed, responsible participation in public life; to ensure through instruction, that students understand the essentials, source, and history of the constitutions of the United States and Arizona, American institutions and ideals (A.R.S. 15-710). 1|Page

Students will understand the importance of each person as an individual with human and civil rights and our shared heritage in the United States. The American history strand is intended to provide students an opportunity to analyze the national experience through time, to recognize the relationships of events and people, and to interpret significant patterns, themes, ideas and beliefs and turning points in American history. The Arizona Common Core Standards ELA-History/Social Studies Literacy represent a significant shift from content standards to process standards. It is important to note that a student should engage with most, if not all, of the reading and writing standards each time they read and write. Lessons should be built around grade appropriate text requiring students to read, and write about what they read citing evidence from the text. Reading and writing should be done on a daily basis. Additionally, Arizonas Common Core Standards for Reading in History/Social Studies require that students evaluate authors differing points of view on the same historical event or issue by assessing the authors claims, reasoning, and evidence, and integrate information from diverse sources into a coherent understanding of an idea or event, noting discrepancies among sources. Arizonas Common Core Standards for Writing in History/Social Studies require that students write arguments based on discipline-specific content. These arguments should introduce precise, knowledgeable claims and counterclaims that are fairly and thoroughly developed, based in research.

Arizona Common Core Anchor Standards- Note on Range and Content of Student Reading
To build a foundation for college and career readiness, students must read widely and deeply from among a broad range of high-quality, increasingly challenging literary and informational texts. Through extensive reading of stories, dramas, poems, and myths from diverse cultures and different time periods, students gain literary and cultural knowledge as well as familiarity with various text structures and elements. By reading texts in history/social studies, science, and other disciplines, students build a foundation of knowledge in these fields that will also give them the background to be better readers in all content areas. Students can only gain this foundation when the curriculum is intentionally and coherently structured to develop rich content knowledge within and across grades. Students also acquire the habits of reading independently and closely, which are essential to their future success

Reading selections in this course work appear to be very limited in terms of Range and Content as outlined in the Arizona Common Core Standards. Text Complexity may or may not have been considered when choosing texts for this course.

For the 11-12 grade bands, the three components of text complexity should be considered.

2|Page

Qualitative Measures- For the most part selected texts should fall within these ranges, with texts becoming increasing more difficult as the year progresses. Text Complexity Grade Bands and Ranges Grade ATOS Degrees of Band Reading Power 11-12 11.20-14.10 67-74

FleschKincaid 10.34-14.2

Lexile

Reading Maturity 9.57-12.00

Source Rater 12.30-14.50

1185-1385

Qualitative Measures--Text should be considered for the level of meaning(s) or purpose, Text Structure, Language Features, Knowledge Demands and Use of Graphics

Reader and Task--Professional judgment based on the teachers: 1. Knowledge of students as readers 2. Understanding the complexity of texts 3. Ability to use a range of instructional approaches Some questions a teacher may ask when considering text; Do my students have the cognitive skills and/or reading skills to read this text? or Will reading this text increase the reading skills of my students? Do my students have the motivation to engage with this text? or Will reading this text increase my students motivation?

Arizona Common Core Anchor Standards-Note on Range and Content in Student Writing
To build a foundation for college and career readiness, students need to learn to use writing as a way of offering and supporting opinions, demonstrating understanding of the subjects they are studying, and conveying real and imagined experiences and events. They learn to appreciate that a key purpose of writing is to communicate clearly to an external, sometimes unfamiliar audience, and they begin to adapt the form and content of their writing to accomplish a particular task and purpose. They develop the capacity to build knowledge on a subject through research projects and to respond analytically to literary and informational sources. To meet these goals, students must devote significant time and effort to writing, producing numerous pieces over short and extended time frames throughout the year. Key writing types are Informational/Explanatory, Argument, and Narrative

3|Page

Initial Observations and Feedback on Draft Course Documents

The following notes provide an overview of ADEs initial observations of the submitted draft courses. The notes address the structural framework used in the documents and the outlined course content.

1. Structural Framework
A consistent framework is not utilized across the three content area documents. In the column describing course content, the US History courses use the term Rationale/Examples, the US Government courses use the term Explanation and Examples and the English courses use the term Examples of Lesson Objectives. None of these terms provide sufficient clarity regarding the precise information that is meant to be communicated, namely a complete outline of the topics and concepts that will be taught. i. How are teachers expected to read the document? ii. In the design of the framework is the integration of the academic standards columns and the course content column clear, fluid and evident? iii. Beyond sample lessons and examples, what is the core content of each course and the sections within each course? While state standards are listed in the draft document, evidence of an additional and intentional alignment to TUSDs standard grade 11 and 12 Social Studies and English courses is notably absent. Since it is the intention of the district to provide the required core content credit to students enrolled in TUSDs Multicultural Viewpoint (draft) courses, it is imperative that the district ensures its students in both standard or multicultural courses are receiving full and equal access to the expected rigorous instruction that reflects the required standards in both social studies and ELA Literacy in History and Social Studies. While the draft document includes 3 columns, one identifying the Arizona Social Studies Standard, one identifying the Arizona Common Core Standards Literacy in History and Social Studies and one identifying content specific to the multicultural course, there is not a clearly defined, intentional and consistent connection across columns. For the most part each column stands separate and connections that are evident are incomplete, less rigorous than required and not at the appropriate grain size. The term Enduring Understandings is generally meant to identify transferable big ideas that give the content meaning and connect the facts and skills being studied. They are central to the discipline, tend to be more abstract in nature and can be applied to other situations. The intention is that students must engage in deep sustained inquiry to fully grasp the meaning of the enduring understanding. Given that enduring understandings are central to a discipline and all history courses must be aligned to the state standards, the enduring understanding in a course provided from a particular viewpoint should not differ from the enduring understanding a student would experience in a mainstream 4|Page

course addressing the same standards. The big ideas should transcend both courses, with the multicultural course providing an additional focus on diverse viewpoints to meet the required expectations. i. In order to meet the rigor and scope required for a US History course aligned to the Arizona Social Studies Standard, enduring understandings should be broader and more generalized. ii. In order to meet the rigor and scope required by the ACCS Literacy in History/Social Studies standards, enduring understandings should be free from bias, allow students to use inquiry processes and develop arguments from multiple perspectives, and create a positive and inclusive climate in classes and schools that builds respect and understanding among students from diverse backgrounds. The English 5, 6 and 7, 8 courses use the term scope and sequence. Generally a scope and sequence refers to the breadth and depth of a specific curriculum. The scope outlines the extent of the subject that will be taught over the course of a semester or year. The sequence refers to the order in which the units/lessons will be taught. Within the scope and sequence are the instructional days or dates, unit focus, individual lesson objectives and standards. This is not the correct terminology for the information that is provided on the 1st page of each document. It appears to be more like a course description. i. This course is divided into 8 sections with 6-12 objectives per section. It is unclear if this is a year course or semester course and how much time will be spent in each section. ii. As the document reads sample lesson plans it is unclear if the listed objectives are the course objectives or just suggestions. It is not evident if the draft multicultural course documents are meant to be course descriptions, curriculum maps or a scope and sequence.

2. Multicultural course content

US History Multicultural Viewpoint, Mexican American Viewpoint, African American Viewpoint o The ELA-History Literacy standard does not call for the writing of a persuasive essay; rather, the standard calls for the writing of arguments focused on discipline-specific content that introduce precise, knowledgeable claims and subclaims. o Verbs used in the explanations/examples/rationale column of the documents are consistently at low levels of rigor and depth of knowledge as compared to expectations outlined by Arizonas Common Core Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies: Students will describe Students will identify Students will understand 5|Page

o o

o o

Student will explain Multiple student performances listed do not require aligned reading or writing skills or use of text-based evidence. Instead, they rely on introspection, personal opinion and/or perspective. All 10 concepts and ensuing performance objectives in the Arizona Social Studies Standard are not readily identified, nor are connections to these standards clearly understood in the middle column outlining the multicultural course content. It is unclear how these courses are fully and adequately covering the chronological timeline encompassing pre-1500 to the present. The center column does not appear to represent the full scope of student learning objectives required by the Arizona Social Studies Standard, but rather appears to narrow the curriculum with limited topics, viewpoints and perspectives. As an example, the following terminology is used: oppressed, assumed superiority of whiteness, Mexican people disenfranchised, violated, exploited, historically underserved populations. The Objective stated on the first page of the US History Multicultural Viewpoint is not reflective of the broad objectives of Strand 1 in the Social Studies Standard. There is a serious lack of specific reference to diverse, rigorous text resources that ensure students have access to multiple viewpoints that provide a balanced approach to the course of study.

US Government Multicultural Viewpoint, Mexican American Viewpoint, African American Viewpoint o TUSDs draft course documents for grade 12 US Government Multicultural Viewpoint, US Government Culturally Relevant Mexican American Viewpoint, and US Government Culturally Relevant African American Viewpoint are identical except for the use of the following phrase: Multicultural Viewpoint historically underserved populations Mexican American Viewpoint Mexican Americans and Americas historically underserved populations African American Viewpoint African Americans and Americas historically underserved populations o There is no evidence to explain why three identical courses have been developed with three different titles and the same content. Its unclear what the message will be to students. Noting this, all further comments will refer to all three draft courses. o The Arizona K-12 Social Studies Standards strand 3 entitled Civics and Government is comprised of five concepts: Foundations of Government, Structure of Government, Functions of Government, Rights, Responsibilities and Roles of Citizenship and Government Systems of the World. TUSDs Multicultural Viewpoint draft courses have nine strands that are specific to parts of the Standards expectations but not to the complete scope of study. The nine strands are: Introduction to Critical Praxis, Declaration of Independence, US Constitution, Separation of Powers, Supreme Court, Presidency, Comparative Politics, the Injustice of Constitutional Law, and Transformative Intellectualism. As a result there is a

6|Page

significant lack of full attention to at least 18 performance objectives which raises serious concerns regarding continuity for connected rigorous learning The course content does not reflect an intentional and purposeful integration of the required Arizona Common Core Standards ELA History/Social Studies Literacy standards. Rigorous reading and writing skills must be addressed as students engage with informational text at the necessary levels of text complexity and respond with deliberate written arguments. TUSDs Multicultural Viewpoint draft course strand 1 Introduction to Critical Praxis. The statement -important that they (students) develop a praxis based methodology by which to critically evaluate and construct meaning is not clearly defined or connected to the specific critical thinking skills required in the social studies and ELA state standards. Components of the methodology and implementation strategies should be clearly identified and evident throughout the course document. The alignment to the state standards in this important area of learning is not evident. While the methodology is identified in the first strand there is no other reference to it throughout the document.

English 5,6 and 7,8 Culturally Relevant Mexican American Viewpoint, African American Viewpoint o It is critically important that all high school English courses prepare students to meet the rigorous demands of Arizonas Common Core ELA Standards. Students must become proficient in reading and comprehending a range of sufficiently complex texts independently, writing effectively when using/analyzing sources, building and presenting knowledge through research and the integration of comparison and synthesis of ideas. All high school English courses are making adjustments to meet these significant instructional shifts and this work must be incorporated into the development of TUSDs multicultural courses, otherwise students will not be adequately prepared for the new standards, assessments and graduation requirements. o Please note the structural framework comments mentioned previously. Enduring understandings should represent big ideas or essential questions rather than a narrow explanation of what students are expected to learn. Documents for these English classes were difficult to review because of the use of the term Examples of Lesson Objectives. It is unclear if these statements are examples of what will be taught or what might be taught. Content to be studied must be clearly defined and aligned with the expected rigor of the ACCS ELA standard. That is not evident in these drafts. o While it is the intent of these courses to provide grade 11 and 12 English core content credit, there is not sufficient evidence that these courses represents the full content and skill set of a traditional grade 11 and 12 English class implementing the Arizona Common Core Standards. The following are a few examples of ACCS ELA standards not clearly evident, or missing entirely in the draft course documents: 11-12.W.9 Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research

7|Page

11-12. SL.6 Adapt speech to a variety of contexts and tasks, demonstrating command of formal English when indicated or appropriate. 11.RL. 10 By the end of grade 11, read and comprehend literary nonfiction in the grades 11-CCR text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range 11-12. RL.2 Determine two or more themes or central ideas of a text and analyze their development over the course of the text, including how they interact and build on one another to produce a complex account; provide an objective summary of the text. 11-12. RL.10 and 11-12. RI. 10 By the end of grade 11, read and comprehend literature, including stories, dramas, and poems, in the grades 11-CCR text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range. 11-12.W.10 Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection, and revision) and shorter time frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of tasks, purposes, and audiences. There is a serious lack of specific reference to diverse, rigorous text resources to be used for instruction. There is a lack of evidence that students have access to multiple viewpoints that provide a balanced approach to the course of study. Verbs used in the sample lesson objectives column of the documents are consistently at low levels of rigor and depth of knowledge as compared to expectations outlined by Arizonas Common Core ELA Standards.

Recommendations
o Curriculum developers revisit the three grade 11 draft multicultural US History courses, the three draft multicultural US Government courses and the two draft multicultural English courses to ensure a full and comprehensive alignment to both the Arizona Social Studies Standard and Arizonas Common Core ELA Standards which include reading, writing, listening and speaking along with literacy in History/Social Studies. The increased levels of rigor in the ELA standards along with a significant focus on text complexity and close reading must be addressed if students are to be successful. Determine that the multicultural history and English courses are fully aligned with the districts traditional history and English course expectations to ensure that students receiving core content credit in the multicultural courses have full and equal access to academic standards requirements and rigorous expectations. Ensure multicultural courses meet the requirements of A.R.S. 15-112 and the Unitary Status Plan by developing courses of study that provide a balanced presentation of diverse viewpoints on controversial issues along with creating a positive and inclusive climate that encourages respect and understanding among students from diverse backgrounds. 8|Page

Follow up
o o o ADE is very willing to provide additional clarification regarding these observations, information on the state academic standards, and more detailed feedback as needed. ADE is very willing to provide additional feedback on revised drafts as the development process continues to unfold. ADE is very willing to work collaboratively with TUSD on professional learning opportunities for district educators as they work to implement and integrate cross content academic standards.

9|Page