Grade Level Expectations Regional Workshops

• NW--February 17, 2004
  Hampton Inn, Colchester

• NE--February 18, 2004
  Lyndon State College

• SW--February 19, 2004
  Holiday Inn, Rutland

• Central--February 26, 2004
  LaGue Inn, Berlin

• SE--March 3, 2004
  Coolidge Hotel, White River Junction

For more information, check The Vermont Institutes website: www.vermontinstitutes.org

Inside this issue:

Calibration--Spring 2004

Arts GCE Review and Future Work

Learning to Write; Writing to Learn

Frequently Asked Questions about the GLES

As part of our ongoing support of local assessment, the Vermont Department of Education contracted The Vermont Institutes to facilitate the portfolio scoring calibration sessions in writing and mathematics for 2004. As in past years, calibration will take place for grades 4, 8, and 10 in mathematics and grades 5, 8, and 10 in writing.

The calibration process provides teachers the opportunity to hone their scoring skills through direct scoring of benchmark work and comparison of their scores with the “true” scores established through benchmarking. Last year, 3,296 Vermont educators participated in calibration. Teachers receive their results directly while principals receive the results for teachers in their schools.

March has been designated as the calibration month. Principals, Curriculum Coordinators, and Superintendents have received letters asking them to consider hosting calibrations. A schedule of district and regional sites will be mailed out in early February.

This year, there are two new aspects of the calibration process. First, teachers will be requested to register on-line so that we can anticipate the number of participants at each site and ensure ample materials and optimal space at each site. Second, we will pilot a process of providing “warm-up” items in high school mathematics prior to the calibration sessions. This could serve to shorten the sessions and provide teachers the chance to practice at their leisure. The “warm-ups” will be mailed to each high school in mid-January and will be located on The Vermont Institutes website at www.vermontinstitutes.org/assessment/. Should this early warm-up process be popular with high school mathematics teachers, it will be extended to other grades and content areas in the future.

If you have any questions or need further information about calibration, please contact Jennifer Morgan at 828-0078 or e-mail: jmorgan@vermontinstitutes.org.

This past year arts educators from around the state, with the help of The Vermont Institutes, developed Grade Cluster Expectations (GCEs) for dance, music, theater, and visual arts as a step in creating local assessments required under Act 68. This work was accomplished using the Vermont Framework of Standards and Learning Opportunities, Vermont curricula, national standard documents, state standard documents, and current research as resources. Grade Cluster Expectations were written for Skill Development (specific to each discipline); as well as Reflection and Critique, Making Connections, and Approach to Work (across the arts disciplines).

Field Reviews for the Arts GCEs were held on December 2, 3, and 4 in Rutland, White River Junction, and Colchester, respectively. Eighty-nine arts educators from around the state traveled to one of the three sites in blistering cold temperatures and snow. After presenting a context for GCE development and use, arts educators shared excitement about how the GCEs could advocate for arts curriculum and instruction. Participants spent the rest of the day reading, responding in writing, and engaging in dynamic conversations about the GCEs and their assessibility.

Overall, feedback from the three sessions was positive and informative. Respondents voiced enthusiasm about having a document that further clarifies what students should know and be able to do in the arts at each grade cluster; in addition, they thought the Arts GCEs were written in a thoughtful way. Further, many hope the GCEs will encourage their communities to address opportunities to learn the arts in their districts. Some concerns that were raised focused on a desire to have more examples to differentiate between grade clusters and on issues of implementation across districts when opportunities to learn are so varied.

The original development committee is now working on a final draft of the GCEs that will address clarifications and changes that were suggested. This draft will be posted on the VI website (www.vermontinstitutes.
org) in early February. In addition, professional development opportunities are planned for using the Grade Cluster Expectations to inform curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

We want to thank all of you who participated in the Field Reviews. Your help is essential to our having a document that will be well used by Vermont educators. If you want to help in other ways in the future, please contact Wendy Cohen at 828-1303 or wcohen@vermontinstitutes.org.

We are actively seeking arts assessment tasks that could inform our work. Specifically, we are looking for instruction/assessment materials that are aligned to Vermont Standards, National Standards, and/or the GCEs.

• Do you have tasks that ask students to show their skill development?
• Do the tasks ask them to reflect and critique; make connections between, among or across disciplines; and approach their work in a certain way?
• Have you created assessment tools (rubrics, etc.) or collected benchmarks (examples of student learning) that show meeting the standards?

If so, we'd love to use them for the next step of the work! There is an abundant wealth of expertise in the area of arts instruction and assessment in Vermont; we would greatly appreciate any work you’re willing to share to benefit arts education for all of our students. Feel free to e-mail, snail mail, or call me for a pick-up: wcohen@vermontinstitutes.org or 802-828-1303.

Wendy Cohen, Arts Assessment Specialist
The Vermont Institutes, 7 West Street, Montpelier, VT 05602

Learning to Write; Writing to Learn

by Karen Kurzman, Director of Writing Initiatives

Vermont has always been a state dedicated to the instruction and assessment of writing, and many schools have actively participated in the state’s portfolio process. Now the rest of the country is noticing how important writing is to academic achievement in the classroom and on tests. The National Council of Teachers of English has made writing a priority with its CoLearn Writing Program. The SAT now requires a writing sample, and the Association of Curriculum Development (ASCD) recently devoted its Summer 2003 Curriculum Update to writing’s role in learning. “Writing’s time has come…and they’re calling for a revolution in how it is taught,” stated the author of “Bolstering the Neglected R.” “As a nation we can barely begin to imagine how powerful K-16 education might be if writing were put in its proper focus” (Curriculum Update 1).

There are two significant purposes for including writing in the classroom. The first is to use writing as a means of learning. In inquiry-based classrooms, when writing becomes the tool for investigation and learning, students become engaged. They are forced to think rather than memorize. When students write, they are constructing, organizing, and conveying meaning of content. Good writing is evidence of clear thinking about a subject, about any subject matter. Writing instruction is a crucial tool in developing critical thinking skills.

“Those seeking proof that writing across the curriculum helps develop writing skills and facilitate learning don’t need to look very far. There is ample evidence to prove the program’s success” (Curriculum Update 5). Pam Childres, a writing teacher in McMallie School, Chattanooga, Tenn., says, “We tracked our student scores one year. We had a control and an experimental group that practiced writing exercises. The students who used writing-to-learn activities finished the year with a mean of seven points higher on their final exams…’ Those students who wrote to learn also had no failures or D grades…. Perhaps most telling, however, was the fact that the students in the experimental group demonstrated a ‘much more positive attitude toward learning’ “(Curriculum
“ Update 5).

Another common way teachers use writing is as an end, rather than the means of learning; it is often used in content assessment. This is unquestionably another significant use. However, without appropriate knowledge of how to teach and assess writing as well as content, teachers are often frustrated with the below-standard writing. Consequently, content only is assessed, and students are left with the erroneous message that only content matters. Writing across the curriculum needs to be used to assess writing skills as well as content—and then to inform instruction.

Professor Toby Fulwiler in Teaching With Writing states that …teachers are seldom trained to understand fully the degree to which language skills are involved in the development of higher thought…. These [American Association of the Humanities reports] studies suggest that writing has an ill-defined and haphazard role in the curriculum. Even when writing has an established role, it is likely to be a superficial or limited one.

If we are interested in helping … schools… do better what they are charged with doing – teaching people to reason systemically, logically, and critically – then we need to balance the curriculum as carefully with regard to writing activities as we currently do with reading activities (3).

Writing across the curriculum is a way to gauge students’ levels of understanding. At a time when state and national exams are looming over all students, the key to student learning, as well as achievement, on these tests may well be an emphasis on writing.

In order to promote better learning through writing, The Vermont Institutes offers systemic, sustained professional development, grades K-12, to enhance student achievement in writing across the curriculum. The program, entitled Write for Vermont, provides on-site professional development tailored to meet individual school and district needs in writing and the use of collaborative local assessment of writing to inform instruction. Recognizing that writing well is a life-long skill all students should own and enjoy, Vermont Writes is passionately dedicated to spreading the craft of the teaching of writing in all Vermont schools.

1. Who and when will the alignment of the math GLEs to the standards-based math series be done?

The Vermont Institutes does not have this task on the agenda at this time. If there is a district or consortium of districts who would like to work on this, please contact Lyn Haas, at lhaas@sover.net.

2. When do we get the final edition of the GLEs?

Very close to final editions of the GLEs for Math, Reading and Writing are on The Vermont Institutes website, on the Assessment page.

The final edition is waiting for an outside reviewer, WestEd, to provide a report of findings, and then those to be addressed. All of this is scheduled to occur prior to February 10.

The completed grade expectations for science for Inquiry and Physical Science are also on the website.

Arts, Physical Education and Health will be posted in mid February; Social Studies, Life Science, Non-Native Language and Technology in March.

3. Should we concentrate on writing the local assessments first since the state assessment will cover the other GLEs?

The state assessment development is in the hands of Measured Progress, an organization based in Portsmouth, NH. That work has already begun, based on the specific GLEs that are indicated as TSNE (Tri-State New England) “fair game.” Locally, teachers and schools will get involved in this through field trials.

Rather than writing the non Tri-State GLE Assessments first, it may make more sense to work on sets within a standard (such as numbers and operations). However, this is a local decision.

Locally, it is important for all teachers to become more and more assessment literate. This means:
Engaging in reading and talking about how we know what students know and are able to do.
Thinking about what resources are already being used to assess learning and align those with the GLEs.
Making decisions about what will be assessed at what grade level.

4. Because of limited assessment time, should the state GLEs be more of an informal assessment and the local GLEs be more specific?

Formal and informal is really not the relevant descriptor here. State, or large-scale assessment, is more structured, perhaps. The items are ones that students respond to in an “on-demand” setting and are addressing concepts and skills that can be assessed in that way.

Local assessments can be more specifically designed to reflect what is going on in a particular classroom or grade level. The assessments may also take place “over-time”; e.g. portfolios.

5. How do we know if our local assessments are on target-valid, good difficulty level, well written, really assessing the GLE?

The Vermont Institutes is designing some resources to help answer these questions. We will post these on the web in early February.

Additionally, the VT-DOE and VI will be ratifying the validation process that has been in place and getting that information out to districts in the near future.

6. Can we use the VISMT Grade 2 Assessment for a local assessment? Has it been aligned to the GLEs at grade 2 and 6. Should there be a form B?

Yes, the VISMT Grade 2 Assessment can be used for a local assessment. Knowledge of the expectations represented in the assessment informed the work on the GLEs but the work of going back and ensuring an alignment has not yet been done. We will be spending much of February through May in the alignment of this and other assessments.

If resources become available, a form B would be great!

7. Is there a handbook for the mathematics assessment work at middle level?

The Mathematics Assessment Team is working on pulling together that work for distribution. We also are working on a Guide for Classroom Assessment and other resources. Stay tuned.

8. Should we be writing district test items without any professional training? Any good resources of examples?

It is, of course, a good idea to have professional development to do this well. However, we are glad to have folks get started in developing assessment items and sending them to us. We will be glad to critique as a form of long distance professional development. We also think that the GLE language will provide solid guidance for item design.

9. We are small schools in a district. Shouldn’t we be doing this as a large team since we all use the same series? Who do we call for guidance?

Working in a team of schools makes tremendous sense, both in terms of human resources, but also for consistency for student expectations. Call or write Lyn Haas to get some ideas for guidance. (828-1306, lhaas@sover.net)