RULES AND REGULATIONS
Title 22—EDUCATION
STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
[ 22 PA. CODE CH. 4 ]
Academic Standards and Assessment; Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening and Mathematics
[40 Pa.B. 5903]
[Saturday, October 16, 2010]The State Board of Education (Board) amends Chapter 4 (relating to academic standards and assessment) and adds Appendix B to read as set forth in Annex A.
This final-omitted rulemaking amends the current academic standards in Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening and Mathematics. The Board acts under authority of the Public School Code of 1949 (code) (24 P. S. §§ 1-101—27-2702).
Purpose
The final-omitted rulemaking amends the Commonwealth's current academic standards in Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening and Mathematics. Through this final-omitted rulemaking, the Commonwealth adopts a uniform set of academic standards in English language arts and mathematics developed through the Common Core State Standards Initiative—an effort coordinated by the National Governors Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) to provide a clear framework to prepare the Nation's children for college and the workforce.
Furthermore, the final-omitted rulemaking maximizes the Commonwealth's prospects for success in receiving funding under Phase 2 of the Race to the Top (RTTT) Fund Program initiated by the United States Department of Education as part of its administration of the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund established under Title XIV of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. See 74 FR 59688 (November 18, 2009) and 75 FR 19496 (April 14, 2010). Under the RTTT Fund Program, a state must adopt Common Core standards by August 2, 2010, to maximize its score in this competitive grant program. If successful, the Commonwealth would receive funding of up to approximately $400 million to advance a comprehensive school reform agenda. (Editor's Note: The United States Department of Education announced Phase II RTTT results on August 24, 2010. While the Commonwealth received full credit for developing and adopting common standards, the Commonwealth was not selected for an RTTT grant.)
In 2008 and 2009, the Board was in the process of updating its academic standards when the Common Core academic standards initiative emerged in 2009 as a policy goal of the NGA, CCSSO and more than 45 states and territories. Common Core is a voluntary, state-led process intended to improve the rigor of academic standards Nationwide and ensure comparability of student achievement measurement across states. The Commonwealth was one of four states Nationally that suspended an ongoing project to revise state-level standards to join in the Common Core effort to achieve a uniform approach to the development of academic standards.
Released on June 2, 2010, the regulations the Board adopted move the standards revision process forward using the Common Core State Standards in English Language Arts and Mathematics. Since the release, and as of July 9, 2010, 23 states have adopted the Common Core standards and the NGA expects that approximately 40 states will take action by September 2010. These kindergarten through 12th grade standards draw from best practices Nationally (including the Commonwealth's nearly 20-year history of standards-based education reform) and international benchmarking to set learning goals aligned with expectations for success in college, career and the global economy. Under this final-omitted rulemaking, students enrolled in public schools (including public charter schools) in this Commonwealth will be expected to demonstrate achievement on these standards beginning in the 2013-14 school year.
Background
In January 1999, the Board adopted regulations requiring school districts to align local curriculum, instruction and assessments with academic standards in Chapter 4 established by the same regulations. The Board adopted the academic standards for Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening and Mathematics simultaneously with the adoption of its Chapter 4 regulations. See 29 Pa.B. 399 (January 16, 1999).
In § 4.12(i) of that final-form rulemaking, the Board made the following commitment:
Every 3 years, the Board will review the State academic standards and State assessments under this section to determine if they are appropriate, clear, specific and challenging, and will make revisions as necessary by revising this chapter.The Board continued to adopt standards in additional subjects. By July 2006, the Board published standards in 12 content areas. In 2007, the Board moved to initiate its review of these standards, beginning again with Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening and Mathematics. Working in partnership with the Department of Education (Department), the Board engaged Capital Area Intermediate Unit 15 to coordinate the standards review process. The result of this work was the proposed standards revision adopted by the Board in April 2009.
Following action by the Governor and then-Secretary of Education Zahorchak on June 4, 2009, the Board withdrew its proposed standards on September 9, 2009, to join the Common Core initiative. When commitment to adopting common standards emerged as a major criterion in the United States Department of Education's RTTT competition (see 74 FR 59688, 59711, 59712, 59732—59735, 59808, 59809), the Board adopted the following stance relative to the Commonwealth's Phase 1 application (January 19, 2010) and consideration of Common Core:
The Board is strongly committed to considering and adopting rigorous academic standards in both math and reading that are consistent with the principles outlined in the [Common Core] memorandum of understanding. The Board's plans to adopt the Common Core are conditioned on two assumptions:(1) the State Board will be provided ample opportunity to conduct a thorough and public vetting of the Common Core that will support successful implementation at scale, and(2) the Common Core will be no less rigorous than the revised state-level standards the State Board was in the process of adopting.Over the past 6 months, the Board has conducted a deliberative and transparent analysis of the Common Core to satisfy the first condition and to gain assurance on the second. This process included the following:
• Commissioning an independent study by Professor Suzanne Lane of the University of Pittsburgh's School of Education to compare the public draft of the Common Core released Nationally on March 10, 2010, with the proposed State-level revisions previously referenced. Dr. Lane's study revealed comparable levels of rigor and relatively similar content alignment between the Common Core and the Commonwealth standards (Lane, 2010).
• To engage the public and specifically education stakeholders in deliberations around Common Core, the Board devoted a portion of its May 6, 2010, public meeting to a presentation of the results of Dr. Lane's study. Dr. Lane addressed the Board and provided detailed tables comparing both sets of standards.
• The Board held a series of regional public roundtables to present study results and gather feedback (May 21, Pittsburgh; May 27, State College; June 9, Philadelphia). Roundtable dates and locations were publicized in Sunshine Act notices and a written communication from the Board to education stakeholders, including Intermediate Unit Executive Directors.
• The Board provided the House and Senate Education Committees with regular, biweekly updates on Common Core. In addition, the Board's Executive Director testified before the Senate Education Committee on May 4, 2010, at a public hearing.
• The Common Core standards were posted on the Board's web site for public review and comment. The standards are also posted at www.corestandards.org.
Consistent with commitments outlined in the Commonwealth's RTTT Fund applications, including the application submitted June 2, 2010, the Board made written public notice of its intent to adopt Common Core 2 weeks prior to its July 1, 2010, meeting. This meeting included three additional opportunities for public comment.
Requirements of the Final-Omitted Rulemaking
The standards describe what students should know and be able to do at all grade levels and prior to high school graduation in both English language arts and mathematics. The standards are organized as follows:
English language arts
Reading. Through ''a staircase of increasing complexity,'' Common Core asks students to develop reading comprehension skills tied to expectations for college and work. Common Core suggests a ''diverse array of classic and contemporary literature as well as challenging informational texts in a range of subjects'' as resources for teachers, without mandating a set reading list. The standards do, however, prescribe ''certain critical types of content for all students, including classic myths and stories from around the world, foundational U.S. documents, seminal works of American literature, and the writings of Shakespeare.''
Writing. Common Core asks students to demonstrate their ability to marshal evidence and demonstrate ''sound reasoning'' in developing clear and convincing written arguments. Research skills are embedded across the Common Core, but ''most prominently in the writing strand since a written analysis and presentation of findings is so often critical.'' Alongside the standards, Common Core provides ''annotated samples of student writing [to] help establish adequate performance levels in writing arguments, informational/explanatory texts, and narratives in the various grades.''
Speaking and listening. Common Core requires students to present ''increasingly complex information, ideas, and evidence through listening and speaking as well as through media.'' The standards emphasize the importance of demonstrating these skills in a variety of settings as authentic postsecondary preparation.
Language. The English language strand emphasizes steadily-increasing command of vocabulary ''through a mix of conversations, direct instruction, and reading.''
Media and technology. Reflecting the wide use of electronic media and other technology in every facet of 21st century life, media and technology skills ''are integrated throughout the standards.''
Mathematics
The standards begin (grades K through 5) with emphasis on ''whole numbers, addition, subtraction, multiplication, division, fractions and decimals''—content that is essential to ''help[ing] young students build the foundation to successfully apply more demanding math concepts and procedures, and move into applications.'' These standards build on both State-level and international evidence to offer a clear, grade-by-grade progression to more complex math, including fractions, negative numbers, and geometry and do so by maintaining a continuous progression from grade to grade. By the end of elementary school, students will be able to perform ''hands on learning in geometry, algebra and probability and statistics'' and be on course for 8th grade algebra.
Common Core standards at the high school level emphasize the importance of ''practice [in] applying mathematical ways of thinking to real world issues and challenges.'' This attention is critical to ensuring rigorous and relevant instruction that helps students draw connections between their study and a range of post-high school demands. The standards also ''emphasize mathematical modeling—the use of mathematics and statistics to analyze empirical situations, understand them better, and improve decisions.''
Both sets of standards provide a basis for success in all academic areas, not just language arts and mathematics classrooms. Importantly, the standards are not curriculum or a prescribed series of activities; rather, school entities, with support from the Department, will use the standards to develop local school curriculum that will meet local students' needs. The Department uses academic standards as the foundation for a set of assessment anchors that identify core content assessed through the Pennsylvania System of School Assessment. The Common Core standards will be integrated in the design of State assessment over a period of 3 school years.
To ensure adequate support for schools in integrating the new standards, the final-omitted rulemaking requires the Department to collaborate with education stakeholders in the design of an implementation plan.
Affected Parties
The final-omitted rulemaking will principally affect the students and professional employees of the public schools of this Commonwealth (including intermediate units, area vocational-technical schools, public charter and alternative schools).
Cost and Paperwork Estimates
Costs are estimated to be negligible for several reasons, including the fact that curriculum design, instruction, assessment and professional development are routine activities of schools. Professional development, for example, is required by the code, supported through State funds and budgeted annually at the local level. Common Core will not result in new costs for professional development; rather, time and resources currently devoted to professional development around the current standards will gradually be refocused toward the Common Core.
Additional considerations informing this estimate include the following:
• The Common Core standards are well-aligned with the Commonwealth's current standards, eliminating the need for wholesale revision of school curriculum.
• The Department developed a comprehensive online library of instructional resources available to districts at no cost. The Standards Aligned System website (www.pdesas.org) will be populated with standards, assessments and teaching tools—all fully-aligned with the Common Core.
• The final-omitted rulemaking provides for a 3-year phase-in to reach full implementation of Common Core. This time line provides districts and schools with important flexibility in managing the transition.
• Finally, Common Core may reduce paperwork associated with transferring students as the initiative will improve the uniformity of school curriculum across states.
Effective Date
This final-omitted rulemaking is effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin.
Sunset Date
It is the policy of the Board to review academic standards on a regular basis; thus, a sunset date is not necessary.
Contact Person
Interested persons may contact Adam Schott, Executive Director, State Board of Education, 333 Market Street, Harrisburg, PA 17126-0333, (717) 783-6808, adschott@ state.pa.us.
Final-Omitted Rulemaking
The Board promulgated these regulations as a final-omitted rulemaking. The Board believes these regulations meet the criteria in section 204(3) of the act of July 31, 1968 (P. L. 769, No. 240) (45 P. S. § 1204(3)), known as the Commonwealth Documents Law (CDL), based on the following considerations:
Under the RTTT Fund program, states must adopt Common Core as released on June 2, 2010; deletions are not permitted. See 75 FR 19496, 19498, 19499 (April 14, 2010) (''Common set of K-12 standards means a set of content standards that define what students must know and be able to do and that are substantially identical across all States in a consortium'' (emphasis added)). Though states may add additional standards, Common Core must comprise at least 85% of a state's academic standards in both English language arts and mathematics. Specifically, ''a State may supplement the common standards with additional standards, provided that the additional standards do not exceed 15% of the State's total standards for that content area.'' See 75 FR 19496, 19499. These parameters inform the Board's determination to promulgate the regulations as a final-omitted rulemaking since public comment could not substantially influence the content of the standards. Should the Board adopt additional, State-specific standards through the 15% allowance, it would do so through proposed rulemaking to ensure significant stakeholder voice in the design of the package.
The Federal guidance for the RTTT Fund competition, which incentivizes state-level adoption of Common Core by August 2, 2010, is another consideration informing the Board's decision to pursue final-omitted rulemaking. To receive maximum points in the selection process prescribed by the United States Department of Education's Final Section Criterion (B)(1)(ii)(b) for Phase 2 applicants, a state must demonstrate adoption of a common set of K-12 standards by August 2, 2010. See 74 FR 59688, 59802 and 75 FR 19496, 19503. See also 74 FR 59688, 59689, 59783. To demonstrate its timely adoption of Common Core standards, a Phase 2 applicant may amend its June 1, 2010, application submission through August 2, 2010, ''by submitting evidence of adopting common standards after June 1, 2010.'' See 74 FR 59688, 59802 n. 12. See also 75 FR 19496, 19501, 19503 n. 5.
The issue of timing is critical: state RTTT applications are evaluated based on a 500-point evaluation, with state-level commitment to ''developing and adopting common standards'' accounting for 40 of these points. See http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/scoring rubric.pdf (RTTT Fund Scoring Rubric). Delaware, the top-ranked state in Phase 1 of the competition, outscored the Commonwealth by 26.2 points, with six highly-competitive state applications separating Delaware and the Commonwealth. See http://www2.ed.gov/programs/racetothetop/phase1-applications/score-summary.pdf (RTTT Fund Phase 1 Final Results). Action by the Board finally adopting Common Core before August 2, 2010, is critical to the success of the Commonwealth's $399.9 million application for funding in the highly-competitive second phase of this initiative. Inasmuch as the final Common Core standards were not released until June 2, 2010, and must be finally adopted by the Board by August 2, 2010, to meet the final selection criteria prescribed by the RTTT Fund program, it was impractical for the Board to engage in proposed rulemaking to consider whether to adopt the Common Core standards.
For these reasons, the Board finds and concludes that proposed rulemaking in advance of adoption of the Common Core academic standards would be impracticable, unnecessary and contrary to the public interest.
Regulatory Review
Under section 5.1(c) of the Regulatory Review Act (71 P. S. § 745.5a(c)), on July 16, 2010, the Board submitted a copy of the final-omitted rulemaking and a copy of a Regulatory Analysis Form to the Independent Regulatory Review Commission (IRRC) and to the Chairpersons of the House and Senate Committees on Education. On the same date, the regulations were submitted to the Office of Attorney General for review and approval under the Commonwealth Attorneys Act (71 P. S. §§ 732-101—732-506).
Under section 5.1(j.2) of the Regulatory Review Act, on August 18, 2010, the final-omitted rulemaking was deemed approved by the House and Senate Committees. Under section 5.1(e) of the Regulatory Review Act, IRRC met on August 19, 2010, and approved the final-omitted rulemaking.
Findings
The Board finds that:
(1) Notice of proposed rulemaking is impracticable, unnecessary and contrary to the public interest under section 204(3) of the CDL and the regulation thereunder, 1 Pa. Code § 7.4(3).
(2) The amendment of the regulations in the manner provided in this final-omitted rulemaking is necessary and appropriate for administration of the code.
Order
The Board, acting under the authority of the code, orders that:
(a) The regulations of the Board, 22 Pa. Code Chapter 4, are amended by amending §§ 4.3, 4.11, 4.12 and by adding Appendix B to read as set forth in Annex A, with ellipses referring to the existing text of the regulations.
(b) The Board will submit this order and Annex A to the Office of General Counsel and the Office of Attorney General for review and approval as to legality and form as required by law.
(c) The Executive Director of the Board shall certify this order and Annex A and deposit them with the Legislative Reference Bureau as required by law.
(d) This order is effective upon publication in the Pennsylvania Bulletin. Appendix B will take effect on July 1, 2013.
ADAM A. SCHOTT,
Executive Director(Editor's Note: For the text of the order of the Independent Regulatory Review Commission relating to this document, see 40 Pa.B. 5106 (September 4, 2010).)
Fiscal Note: 6-322. (1) General Fund; (2) Implementing Year 2010-11 is $250,000; (3) 1st Succeeding Year 2011-12 is $250,000; 2nd Succeeding Year 2012-13 is $250,000; 3rd Succeeding Year 2013-14 is $0; 4th Succeeding Year 2014-15 is $0; 5th Succeeding Year 2015-16 is $0;
Teacher Basic PA Professional Education Assessment Development (4) 2009-10 Program— $4,871,339,000 $38,000,000 $25,000,000 2008-09 Program— $5,226,142,000 $44,600,000 $39,698,000 2007-08 Program— $4,951,429,000 $31,619,000 $30,367,000 (7) PA Assessment; (8) recommends adoption. Funds in the Department's PA Assessment appropriation will cover this cost.
Annex A
TITLE 22. EDUCATION
PART I. STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
Subpart A. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
CHAPTER 4. ACADEMIC STANDARDS AND ASSESSMENT
GENERAL PROVISIONS § 4.3. Definitions.
The following words and terms, when used in this chapter, have the following meanings, unless the context clearly indicates otherwise:
* * * * * Common Core State Standards—Academic standards for English language arts and mathematics developed through a Nationwide, state-led process coordinated by the National Governors Association and the Council of Chief State School Officers and in collaboration with teachers, content experts and other education stakeholders. The standards define the knowledge and skills students should have within their K-12 education careers so that they will graduate high school able to succeed in entry-level, credit-bearing academic college courses and in workforce training programs.
* * * * *
ACADEMIC STANDARDS AND PLANNING § 4.11. Purpose of public education.
* * * * * (g) Public schools provide instruction throughout the curriculum so that students may develop knowledge and skills in the following areas:
(1) Reading, writing, speaking, listening and English language arts.
(2) Mathematics.
(3) Science and technology.
(4) Environment and ecology.
(5) Social studies (civics and government, geography, economics and history).
(6) Arts and humanities.
(7) Career education and work.
(8) Health, safety and physical education.
(9) Family and consumer science.
* * * * * § 4.12. Academic standards.
(a) School entities may develop, expand or improve existing academic standards in the following content areas:
(1) Science and technology. Study of the natural world and facts, principles, theories and laws in the areas of biology, chemistry, physics and earth sciences. Technology is the application of science to enable societal development, including food and fiber production, manufacturing, building, transportation and communication. Science and technology share the use of the senses, science processes, inquiry, investigation, analysis and problem solving strategies.
(2) Environment and ecology. Understanding the components of ecological systems and their interrelationships with social systems and technologies. These components incorporate the disciplines of resource management, agricultural diversity, government and the impact of human actions on natural systems. This interaction leads to the study of watersheds, threatened and endangered species, pest management and the development of laws and regulations.
(3) Social studies.
(i) History. Study of the record of human experience including important events; interactions of culture, race and ideas; the nature of prejudice; change and continuity in political systems; effects of technology; importance of global-international perspectives; and the integration of geography, economics and civics studies on major developments in the history of the Commonwealth, the United States and the world.
(ii) Geography. Study of relationships among people, places and environments, of geographic tools and methods, characteristics of place, concept of region and physical processes.
(iii) Civics and government. Study of United States constitutional democracy, its values and principles, study of the Constitution of the Commonwealth and government including the study of principles, operations and documents of government, the rights and responsibilities of citizenship, how governments work and international relations.
(iv) Economics. Study of how individuals and societies choose to use resources to produce, distribute and consumer goods and services. Knowledge of how economies work, economic reasoning and basic economic concepts, economic decision making, economic systems, the Commonwealth and the United States economy and international trade.
(4) Arts and humanities. Study of dance, theatre, music, visual arts, language and literature including forms of expression, historical and cultural context, critical and aesthetic judgment and production, performance or exhibition of work.
(5) Career education and work. Understanding career options in relationship to individual interests, aptitudes and skills including the relationship between changes in society, technology, government and economy and their effect on individuals and careers. Development of knowledge and skill in job-seeking and job-retaining skills and, for students completing vocational-technical programs, the skills to succeed in the occupation for which they are prepared.
(6) Health, safety and physical education. Study of concepts and skills which affect personal, family and community health and safety, nutrition, physical fitness, movement concepts and strategies, safety in physical activity settings, and leadership and cooperation in physical activities.
(7) Family and consumer science. Understanding the role of consumers as a foundation for managing available resources to provide for personal and family needs and to provide basic knowledge of child health and child care skills.
(8) Through June 30, 2013: Reading, writing, speaking and listening.
(i) Reading. The application of phonemic awareness, phonics and word study, vocabulary, fluency and text comprehension in reading critically across subject areas; the interpretation and analysis of literary expression with analysis of the origins and structures of the English language and learning how to search a variety of texts to conduct research.
(ii) Writing. Narrative, informational and persuasive formal writing for an audience, including spelling and editing skills; and informal writing to capture and organize information for individual use.
(iii) Speaking and listening. Participation in conversation and formal speaking presentations.
(iv) Beginning July 1, 2013, following full implementation of a transition plan to be developed by the Department in collaboration with education stakeholders, academic standards will be based on the Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. States may supplement the Common Core State Standards with additional, State-specific academic standards.
(9) Mathematics. The understanding of fundamental ideas and the development of proficient mathematical skills in numbers, computation, measurement, statistics and data analysis, probability and predictions, algebra and functions, geometry, trigonometry and concepts of calculus. Using this content, students will learn to think, reason and communicate mathematically. Students will learn to model real-world situations by creating appropriate representations of numerical quantities and plan and implement problem-solving strategies to answer the question in the context of the situation. Beginning July 1, 2013, following implementation of a transition plan to be developed by the Department in collaboration with education stakeholders, academic standards will be based on the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics. States may supplement the Common Core State Standards with additional, State-specific academic standards.
* * * * *
APPENDIX B
Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects
Table of Contents Introduction
Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects K-5
College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading
Reading Standards for Literature K-5
Reading Standards for Informational Text K-5
Reading Standards: Foundational Skills K-5
College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Writing
Writing Standards K-5
College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Speaking and Listening
Speaking and Listening Standards K-5
College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Language
Language Standards K-5
Language Progressive Skills, by GradeStandard 10: Range, Quality, and Complexity of Student Reading K-5
Staying on Topic Within a Grade and Across Grades
Standards for English Language Arts 6-12
College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading
Reading Standards for Literature 6-12
Reading Standards for Informational Text 6-12College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Writing
Writing Standards 6-12
College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Speaking and Listening
Speaking and Listening Standards 6-12
College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Language
Language Standards 6-12
Language Progressive Skills, by GradeStandard 10: Range, Quality, and Complexity of Student Reading 6-12
Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects
College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading
Reading Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies 6-12
Reading Standards for Literacy in Science and Technical Subjects 6-12College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Writing
Writing Standards for Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects 6-12
Introduction The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects (''the Standards'') are the culmination of an extended, broad-based effort to fulfill the charge issued by the states to create the next generation of K-12 standards in order to help ensure that all students are college and career ready in literacy no later than the end of high school.
The present work, led by the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO) and the National Governors Association (NGA), builds on the foundation laid by states in their decades-long work on crafting high-quality education standards. The Standards also draw on the most important international models as well as research and input from numerous sources, including state departments of education, scholars, assessment developers, professional organizations, educators from kindergarten through college, and parents, students, and other members of the public. In their design and content, refined through successive drafts and numerous rounds of feedback, the Standards represent a synthesis of the best elements of standards-related work to date and an important advance over that previous work.
As specified by CCSSO and NGA, the Standards are (1) research and evidence based, (2) aligned with college and work expectations, (3) rigorous, and (4) internationally benchmarked. A particular standard was included in the document only when the best available evidence indicated that its mastery was essential for college and career readiness in a twenty-first-century, globally competitive society. The Standards are intended to be a living work: as new and better evidence emerges, the Standards will be revised accordingly.
The Standards are an extension of a prior initiative led by CCSSO and NGA to develop College and Career Readiness (CCR) standards in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language as well as in mathematics. The CCR Reading, Writing, and Speaking and Listening Standards, released in draft form in September 2009, serve, in revised form, as the backbone for the present document. Grade-specific K-12 standards in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language translate the broad (and, for the earliest grades, seemingly distant) aims of the CCR standards into age- and attainment-appropriate terms.
The Standards set requirements not only for English language arts (ELA) but also for literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Just as students must learn to read, write, speak, listen, and use language effectively in a variety of content areas, so too must the Standards specify the literacy skills and understandings required for college and career readiness in multiple disciplines. Literacy standards for grade 6 and above are predicated on teachers of ELA, history/social studies, science, and technical subjects using their content area expertise to help students meet the particular challenges of reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language in their respective fields. It is important to note that the 6-12 literacy standards in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects are not meant to replace content standards in those areas but rather to supplement them. States may incorporate these standards into their standards for those subjects or adopt them as content area literacy standards.
As a natural outgrowth of meeting the charge to define college and career readiness, the Standards also lay out a vision of what it means to be a literate person in the twenty-first century. Indeed, the skills and understandings students are expected to demonstrate have wide applicability outside the classroom or workplace. Students who meet the Standards readily undertake the close, attentive reading that is at the heart of understanding and enjoying complex works of literature. They habitually perform the critical reading necessary to pick carefully through the staggering amount of information available today in print and digitally. They actively seek the wide, deep, and thoughtful engagement with high-quality literary and informational texts that builds knowledge, enlarges experience, and broadens worldviews. They reflexively demonstrate the cogent reasoning and use of evidence that is essential to both private deliberation and responsible citizenship in a democratic republic. In short, students who meet the Standards develop the skills in reading, writing, speaking, and listening that are the foundation for any creative and purposeful expression in language.
June 2, 2010
Key Design Considerations CCR and grade-specific standards
The CCR standards anchor the document and define general, cross-disciplinary literacy expectations that must be met for students to be prepared to enter college and workforce training programs ready to succeed. The K-12 grade-specific standards define end-of-year expectations and a cumulative progression designed to enable students to meet college and career readiness expectations no later than the end of high school. The CCR and high school (grades 9—12) standards work in tandem to define the college and career readiness line—the former providing broad standards, the latter providing additional specificity. Hence, both should be considered when developing college and career readiness assessments.
Students advancing through the grades are expected to meet each year's grade-specific standards, retain or further develop skills and understandings mastered in preceding grades, and work steadily toward meeting the more general expectations described by the CCR standards.
Grade levels for K-8; grade bands for 9-10 and 11-12
The Standards use individual grade levels in kindergarten through grade 8 to provide useful specificity; the Standards use two-year bands in grades 9-12 to allow schools, districts, and states flexibility in high school course design.
A focus on results rather than means
By emphasizing required achievements, the Standards leave room for teachers, curriculum developers, and states to determine how those goals should be reached and what additional topics should be addressed. Thus, the Standards do not mandate such things as a particular writing process or the full range of metacognitive strategies that students may need to monitor and direct their thinking and learning. Teachers are thus free to provide students with whatever tools and knowledge their professional judgment and experience identify as most helpful for meeting the goals set out in the Standards.
An integrated model of literacy
Although the Standards are divided into Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language strands for conceptual clarity, the processes of communication are closely connected, as reflected throughout this document. For example, Writing standard 9 requires that students be able to write about what they read. Likewise, Speaking and Listening standard 4 sets the expectation that students will share findings from their research.
Research and media skills blended into the Standards as a whole
To be ready for college, workforce training, and life in a technological society, students need the ability to gather, comprehend, evaluate, synthesize, and report on information and ideas, to conduct original research in order to answer questions or solve problems, and to analyze and create a high volume and extensive range of print and nonprint texts in media forms old and new. The need to conduct research and to produce and consume media is embedded into every aspect of today's curriculum. In like fashion, research and media skills and understandings are embedded throughout the Standards rather than treated in a separate section.
Shared responsibility for students' literacy development
The Standards insist that instruction in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language be a shared responsibility within the school. The K-5 standards include expectations for reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language applicable to a range of subjects, including but not limited to ELA. The grades 6-12 standards are divided into two sections, one for ELA and the other for history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. This division reflects the unique, time-honored place of ELA teachers in developing students' literacy skills while at the same time recognizing that teachers in other areas must have a role in this development as well.
Part of the motivation behind the interdisciplinary approach to literacy promulgated by the Standards is extensive research establishing the need for college and career ready students to be proficient in reading complex informational text independently in a variety of content areas. Most of the required reading in college and workforce training programs is informational in structure and challenging in content; postsecondary education programs typically provide students with both a higher volume of such reading than is generally required in K-12 schools and comparatively little scaffolding.
The Standards are not alone in calling for a special emphasis on informational text. The 2009 reading framework of the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) requires a high and increasing proportion of informational text on its assessment as students advance through the grades.
Distribution of Literary and Informational Passages by Grade in the 2009 NAEP Reading Framework
Grade Literary Informational 4 50% 50% 8 45% 55% 12 30% 70% Source: National Assessment Governing Board. (2008). Reading framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
The Standards aim to align instruction with this framework so that many more students than at present can meet the requirements of college and career readiness. In K-5, the Standards follow NAEP's lead in balancing the reading of literature with the reading of informational texts, including texts in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. In accord with NAEP's growing emphasis on informational texts in the higher grades, the Standards demand that a significant amount of reading of informational texts take place in and outside the ELA classroom. Fulfilling the Standards for 6-12 ELA requires much greater attention to a specific category of informational text—literary nonfiction—than has been traditional. Because the ELA classroom must focus on literature (stories, drama, and poetry) as well as literary nonfiction, a great deal of informational reading in grades 6-12 must take place in other classes if the NAEP assessment framework is to be matched instructionally.1 To measure students' growth toward college and career readiness, assessments aligned with the Standards should adhere to the distribution of texts across grades cited in the NAEP framework.
NAEP likewise outlines a distribution across the grades of the core purposes and types of student writing. The 2011 NAEP framework, like the Standards, cultivates the development of three mutually reinforcing writing capacities: writing to persuade, to explain, and to convey real or imagined experience. Evidence concerning the demands of college and career readiness gathered during development of the Standards concurs with NAEP's shifting emphases: standards for grades 9-12 describe writing in all three forms, but, consistent with NAEP, the overwhelming focus of writing throughout high school should be on arguments and informative/explanatory texts.2
Distribution of Communicative Purposes by Grade in the 2011 NAEP Writing Framework
Grade To Persuade To Explain To Convey Experience 4 30% 35% 35% 8 35% 35% 30% 12 40% 40% 20% Source: National Assessment Governing Board. (2007). Writing framework for the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress, pre-publication edition. Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc.
It follows that writing assessments aligned with the Standards should adhere to the distribution of writing purposes across grades outlined by NAEP.
Focus and coherence in instruction and assessment
While the Standards delineate specific expectations in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language, each standard need not be a separate focus for instruction and assessment. Often, several standards can be addressed by a single rich task. For example, when editing writing, students address Writing standard 5 (''Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach'') as well as Language standards 1-3 (which deal with conventions of standard English and knowledge of language). When drawing evidence from literary and informational texts per Writing standard 9, students are also demonstrating their comprehension skill in relation to specific standards in Reading. When discussing something they have read or written, students are also demonstrating their speaking and listening skills. The CCR anchor standards themselves provide another source of focus and coherence.
The same ten CCR anchor standards for Reading apply to both literary and informational texts, including texts in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. The ten CCR anchor standards for Writing cover numerous text types and subject areas. This means that students can develop mutually reinforcing skills and exhibit mastery of standards for reading and writing across a range of texts and classrooms.
What is not covered by the Standards
The Standards should be recognized for what they are not as well as what they are. The most important intentional design limitations are as follows:
1) The Standards define what all students are expected to know and be able to do, not how teachers should teach. For instance, the use of play with young children is not specified by the Standards, but it is welcome as a valuable activity in its own right and as a way to help students meet the expectations in this document. Furthermore, while the Standards make references to some particular forms of content, including mythology, foundational U.S. documents, and Shakespeare, they do not—indeed, cannot—enumerate all or even most of the content that students should learn. The Standards must therefore be complemented by a well-developed, content-rich curriculum consistent with the expectations laid out in this document.
2) While the Standards focus on what is most essential, they do not describe all that can or should be taught. A great deal is left to the discretion of teachers and curiculum developers. The aim of the Standards is to articulate the fundamentals, not to set out an exhaustive list or a set of restrictions that limits what can be taught beyond what is specified herein.
3) The Standards do not define the nature of advanced work for students who meet the Standards prior to the end of high school. For those students, advanced work in such areas as literature, composition, language, and journalism should be available. This work should provide the next logical step up from the college and career readiness baseline established here.
4) The Standards set grade-specific standards but do not define the intervention methods or materials necessary to support students who are well below or well above grade-level expectations. No set of grade-specific standards can fully reflect the great variety in abilities, needs, learning rates, and achievement levels of students in any given classroom. However, the Standards do provide clear signposts along the way to the goal of college and career readiness for all students.
5) It is also beyond the scope of the Standards to define the full range of supports appropriate for English language learners and for students with special needs. At the same time, all students must have the opportunity to learn and meet the same high standards if they are to access the knowledge and skills necessary in their post-high school lives.
Each grade will include students who are still acquiring English. For those students, it is possible to meet the standards in reading, writing, speaking, and listening without displaying native-like control of conventions and vocabulary.
The Standards should also be read as allowing for the widest possible range of students to participate fully from the outset and as permitting appropriate accommodations to ensure maximum participation of students with special education needs. For example, for students with disabilities reading should allow for the use of Braille, screen-reader technology, or other assistive devices, while writing should include the use of a scribe, computer, or speech-to-text technology. In a similar vein, speaking and listening should be interpreted broadly to include sign language.
6) While the ELA and content area literacy components described herein are critical to college and career readiness, they do not define the whole of such readiness. Students require a wide-ranging, rigorous academic preparation and, particularly in the early grades, attention to such matters as social, emotional, and physical development and approaches to learning. Similarly, the Standards define literacy expectations in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects, but literacy standards in other areas, such as mathematics and health education, modeled on those in this document are strongly encouraged to facilitate a comprehensive, schoolwide literacy program.
Students Who are College and Career Ready in Reading, Writing, Speaking, Listening, and Language The descriptions that follow are not standards themselves but instead offer a portrait of students who meet the standards set out in this document. As students advance through the grades and master the standards in reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language, they are able to exhibit with increasing fullness and regularity these capacities of the literate individual.
• They demonstrate independence.
Students can, without significant scaffolding, comprehend and evaluate complex texts across a range of types and disciplines, and they can construct effective arguments and convey intricate or multifaceted information. Likewise, students are able independently to discern a speaker's key points, request clarification, and ask relevant questions. They build on others' ideas, articulate their own ideas, and confirm they have been understood. Without prompting, they demonstrate command of standard English and acquire and use a wide-ranging vocabulary. More broadly, they become self-directed learners, effectively seeking out and using resources to assist them, including teachers, peers, and print and digital reference materials.
• They build strong content knowledge.
Students establish a base of knowledge across a wide range of subject matter by engaging with works of quality and substance. They become proficient in new areas through research and study. They read purposefully and listen attentively to gain both general knowledge and discipline-specific expertise. They refine and share their knowledge through writing and speaking.
• They respond to the varying demands of audience, task, purpose, and discipline.
Students adapt their communication in relation to audience, task, purpose, and discipline. They set and adjust purpose for reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language use as warranted by the task. They appreciate nuances, such as how the composition of an audience should affect tone when speaking and how the connotations of words affect meaning. They also know that different disciplines call for different types of evidence (e.g., documentary evidence in history, experimental evidence in science).
• They comprehend as well as critique.
Students are engaged and open-minded-but discerning-readers and listeners. They work diligently to understand precisely what an author or speaker is saying, but they also question an author's or speaker's assumptions and premises and assess the veracity of claims and the soundness of reasoning.
• They value evidence.
Students cite specific evidence when offering an oral or written interpretation of a text. They use relevant evidence when supporting their own points in writing and speaking, making their reasoning clear to the reader or listener, and they constructively evaluate others' use of evidence.
• They use technology and digital media strategically and capably.
Students employ technology thoughtfully to enhance their reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language use. They tailor their searches online to acquire useful information efficiently, and they integrate what they learn using technology with what they learn offline. They are familiar with the strengths and limitations of various technological tools and mediums and can select and use those best suited to their communication goals.
• They come to understand other perspectives and cultures.
Students appreciate that the twenty-first-century classroom and workplace are settings in which people from often widely divergent cultures and who represent diverse experiences and perspectives must learn and work together. Students actively seek to understand other perspectives and cultures through reading and listening, and they are able to communicate effectively with people of varied backgrounds. They evaluate other points of view critically and constructively. Through reading great classic and contemporary works of literature representative of a variety of periods, cultures, and worldviews, students can vicariously inhabit worlds and have experiences much different than their own.
How to Read This Document Overall Document Organization
The Standards comprise three main sections: a comprehensive K-5 section and two content area-specific sections for grades 6-12, one for ELA and one for history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Three appendices accompany the main document.
Each section is divided into strands. K-5 and 6-12 ELA have Reading, Writing, Speaking and Listening, and Language strands; the 6-12 history/social studies, science, and technical subjects section focuses on Reading and Writing. Each strand is headed by a strand-specific set of College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards that is identical across all grades and content areas.
Standards for each grade within K-8 and for grades 9-10 and 11-12 follow the CCR anchor standards in each strand. Each grade-specific standard (as these standards are collectively referred to) corresponds to the same-numbered CCR anchor standard. Put another way, each CCR anchor standard has an accompanying grade-specific standard translating the broader CCR statement into grade-appropriate end-of-year expectations.
Individual CCR anchor standards can be identified by their strand, CCR status, and number (R.CCR.6, for example). Individual grade-specific standards can be identified by their strand, grade, and number (or number and letter, where applicable), so that RI.4.3, for example, stands for Reading, Informational Text, grade 4, standard 3 and W.5.1a stands for Writing, grade 5, standard 1a. Strand designations can be found in brackets alongside the full strand title.
Who is responsible for which portion of the Standards?
A single K-5 section lists standards for reading, writing, speaking, listening, and language across the curriculum, reflecting the fact that most or all of the instruction students in these grades receive comes from one teacher. Grades 6-12 are covered in two content area-specific sections, the first for the English language arts teacher and the second for teachers of history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Each section uses the same CCR anchor standards but also includes grade-specific standards tuned to the literacy requirements of the particular discipline(s).
Key Features of the Standards
Reading: Text complexity and the growth of comprehension
The Reading standards place equal emphasis on the sophistication of what students read and the skill with which they read. Standard 10 defines a grade-by-grade ''staircase'' of increasing text complexity that rises from beginning reading to the college and career readiness level. Whatever they are reading, students must also show a steadily growing ability to discern more from and make fuller use of text, including making an increasing number of connections among ideas and between texts, considering a wider range of textual evidence, and becoming more sensitive to inconsistencies, ambiguities, and poor reasoning in texts.
Writing: Text types, responding to reading, and research
The Standards acknowledge the fact that whereas some writing skills, such as the ability to plan, revise, edit, and publish, are applicable to many types of writing, other skills are more properly defined in terms of specific writing types: arguments, informative/explanatory texts, and narratives. Standard 9 stresses the importance of the writing-reading connection by requiring students to draw upon and write about evidence from literary and informational texts. Because of the centrality of writing to most forms of inquiry, research standards are prominently included in this strand, though skills important to research are infused throughout the document.
Speaking and Listening: Flexible communication and collaboration
Including but not limited to skills necessary for formal presentations, the Speaking and Listening standards require students to develop a range of broadly useful oral communication and interpersonal skills. Students must learn to work together, express and listen carefully to ideas, integrate information from oral, visual, quantitative, and media sources, evaluate what they hear, use media and visual displays strategically to help achieve communicative purposes, and adapt speech to context and task.
Language: Conventions, effective use, and vocabulary
The Language standards include the essential ''rules'' of standard written and spoken English, but they also approach language as a matter of craft and informed choice among alternatives. The vocabulary standards focus on understanding words and phrases, their relationships, and their nuances and on acquiring new vocabulary, particularly general academic and domain-specific words and phrases.
Appendices A, B, and C
Appendix A contains supplementary material on reading, writing, speaking and listening, and language as well as a glossary of key terms. Appendix B consists of text exemplars illustrating the complexity, quality, and range of reading appropriate for various grade levels with accompanying sample performance tasks. Appendix C includes annotated samples demonstrating at least adequate performance in student writing at various grade levels.
STANDARDS FOR ENGLISH LANGUAGE ARTS & LITERACY IN HISTORY/SOCIAL STUDIES, SCIENCE, AND TECHNICAL SUBJECTS
K-5
COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS ANCHOR STANDARDS FOR READING The K-5 standards on the following pages define what students should understand and be able to do by the end of each grade. They correspond to the College and Career Readiness (CCR) anchor standards below by number. The CCR and grade-specific standards are necessary complements—the former providing broad standards, the latter providing additional specificity—that together define the skills and understandings that all students must demonstrate.
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.
Key Ideas and Details
1. 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 the text.
2. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas.
3. Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over the course of a text.
Craft and Structure
4. Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining technical, connotative, and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word choices shape meaning or tone.
5. Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole.
6. Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.
Integration of Knowledge and Ideas
7. Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse media and formats, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words.*
8. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.
9. Analyze how two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order to build knowledge or to compare the approaches the authors take.
Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity
10. Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.
*Please see ''Research to Build and Present Knowledge'' in Writing and ''Comprehension and Collaboration'' in Speaking and Listening for additional standards relevant to gathering, assessing, and applying information from print and digital sources.
Reading Standards for Literature K-5[RL]
The following standards offer a focus for instruction each year and help ensure that students gain adequate exposure to a range of texts and tasks. Rigor is also infused through the requirement that students read increasingly complex texts through the grades. Students advancing through the grades are expected to meet each year's grade-specific standards and retain or further develop skills and understandings mastered in preceding grades.
Kindergartners: Grade 1 students: Grade 2 students: Key Ideas and Details 1. With prompting and support, ask and answer questions about key details in a text. 1. Ask and answer questions about key details in a text. 1. Ask and answer such questions as who, what, where, when, why, and how to demonstrate understanding of key details in a text. 2. With prompting and support, retell familiar stories, including key details. 2. Retell stories, including key details, and demonstrate understanding of their central message or lesson. 2. Recount stories, including fables and folktales from diverse cultures, and determine their central message, lesson, or moral. 3. With prompting and support, identify characters, settings, and major events in a story. 3. Describe characters, settings, and major events in a story, using key details. 3. Describe how characters in a story respond to major events and challenges. Craft and Structure 4. Ask and answer questions about unknown words in a text. 4. Identify words and phrases in stories or poems that suggest feelings or appeal to the senses. 4. Describe how words and phrases (e.g., regular beats, alliteration, rhymes, repeated lines) supply rhythm and meaning in a story, poem, or song. 5. Recognize common types of texts (e.g., storybooks, poems). 5. Explain major differences between books that tell stories and books that give information, drawing on a wide reading of a range of text types. 5. Describe the overall structure of a story, including describing how the beginning introduces the story and the ending concludes the action. 6. With prompting and support, name the author and illustrator of a story and define the role of each in telling the story. 6. Identify who is telling the story at various points in a text. 6. Acknowledge differences in the points of view of characters, including by speaking in a different voice for each character when reading dialogue aloud. Integration of Knowledge and Ideas 7. With prompting and support, describe the relationship between illustrations and the story in which they appear (e.g., what moment in a story an illustration depicts). 7. Use illustrations and details in a story to describe its characters, setting, or events. 7. Use information gained from the illustrations and words in a print or digital text to demonstrate understanding of its characters, setting, or plot. 8. (Not applicable to literature) 8. (Not applicable to literature) 8. (Not applicable to literature) 9. With prompting and support, compare and contrast the adventures and experiences of characters in familiar stories. 9. Compare and contrast the adventures and experiences of characters in stories. 9. Compare and contrast two or more versions of the same story (e.g., Cinderella stories) by different authors or from different cultures. Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity 10. Actively engage in group reading activities with purpose and understanding. 10. With prompting and support, read prose and poetry of appropriate complexity for grade 1. 10. By the end of the year, read and comprehend literature, including stories and poetry, in the grades 2-3 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range. Reading Standards for Literature K-5[RL]
Grade 3 students: Grade 4 students: Grade 5 students: Key Ideas and Details 1. Ask and answer questions to demonstrate understanding of a text, referring explicitly to the text as the basis for the answers. 1. Refer to details and examples in a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text. 1. Quote accurately from a text when explaining what the text says explicitly and when drawing inferences from the text. 2. Recount stories, including fables, folktales, and myths from diverse cultures; determine the central message, lesson, or moral and explain how it is conveyed through key details in the text. 2. Determine a theme of a story, drama, or poem from details in the text; summarize the text. 2. Determine a theme of a story, drama, or poem from details in the text, including how characters in a story or drama respond to challenges or how the speaker in a poem reflects upon a topic; summarize the text. 3. Describe characters in a story (e.g., their traits, motivations, or feelings) and explain how their actions contribute to the sequence of events. 3. Describe in depth a character, setting, or event in a story or drama, drawing on specific details in the text (e.g., a character's thoughts, words, or actions). 3. Compare and contrast two or more characters, settings, or events in a story or drama, drawing on specific details in the text (e.g., how characters interact). Craft and Structure 4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, distinguishing literal from nonliteral language. 4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including those that allude to significant characters found in mythology (e.g., Herculean). 4. Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including figurative language such as metaphors and similes. 5. Refer to parts of stories, dramas, and poems when writing or speaking about a text, using terms such as chapter, scene, and stanza; describe how each successive part builds on earlier sections. 5. Explain major differences between poems, drama, and prose, and refer to the structural elements of poems (e.g., verse, rhythm, meter) and drama (e.g., casts of characters, settings, descriptions, dialogue, stage directions) when writing or speaking about a text. 5. Explain how a series of chapters, scenes, or stanzas fits together to provide the overall structure of a particular story, drama, or poem. 6. Distinguish their own point of view from that of the narrator or those of the characters. 6. Compare and contrast the point of view from which different stories are narrated, including the difference between first- and third-person narrations. 6. Describe how a narrator's or speaker's point of view influences how events are described. Integration of Knowledge and Ideas 7. Explain how specific aspects of a text's illustrations contribute to what is conveyed by the words in a story (e.g., create mood, emphasize aspects of a character or setting). 7. Make connections between the text of a story or drama and a visual or oral presentation of the text, identifying where each version reflects specific descriptions and directions in the text. 7. Analyze how visual and multimedia elements contribute to the meaning, tone, or beauty of a text (e.g., graphic novel, multimedia presentation of fiction, folktale, myth, poem). 8. (Not applicable to literature) 8. (Not applicable to literature) 8. (Not applicable to literature) 9. Compare and contrast the themes, settings, and plots of stories written by the same author about the same or similar characters (e.g., in books from a series). 9. Compare and contrast the treatment of similar themes and topics (e.g., opposition of good and evil) and patterns of events (e.g., the quest) in stories, myths, and traditional literature from different cultures. 9. Compare and contrast stories in the same genre (e.g., mysteries and adventure stories) on their approaches to similar themes and topics. Range of Reading and Level of Text Complexity 10. By the end of the year, read and comprehend literature, including stories, dramas, and poetry, at the high end of the grades 2-3 text complexity band independently and proficiently. 10. By the end of the year, read and comprehend literature, including stories, dramas, and poetry, in the grades 4-5 text complexity band proficiently, with scaffolding as needed at the high end of the range. 10. By the end of the year, read and comprehend literature, including stories, dramas, and poetry, at the high end of the grades 4-5 text complexity band independently and proficiently.
[Continued on next Web Page] _______
1 The percentages on the table reflect the sum of student reading, not just reading in ELA settings. Teachers of senior English classes, for example, are not required to devote 70 percent of reading to informational texts. Rather, 70 percent of student reading across the grade should be informational.
2 As with reading, the percentages in the table reflect the sum of student writing, not just writing in ELA settings.
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Bulletin full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
