Chester: hoping by end of 2016 we'll have a redrafted set of frameworks that we'll send out for public comment
presentation is preview of October Board: Monday night meeting will be entirely on framework review
revision of 2011 frameworks "based on lessons learned over last five years of implementation"
review panel with four meetings, January-July: teachers K-12 plus higher ed
external content committee met in September for a review
presenting proposals for standard revisions at October meeting; vote to send to public comment at November meeting
public comment open until January
final revisions January-February or March
Final vote in March or April
staff reviews two samples of sorts of revisions being proposed
Noyce: overall emphasis in changes?
overall coherence and focus of standards
"lessons learned in implementation"
content is great, but there's a little trouble in integrating them into everything else
"some of the question is what should we keep as standards, and what should be included as implementation supports?"
Chester: find the question of close reading coming up in the field
"what it does mean, what it doesn't mean"
math example: concern about students getting to algebra by 8th grade, calculus by 12th grade: do standards preclude that?
No, absolutely not
"close reading" comes from first reading standard which says "read closely"
"there's a debate about if 'close reading' is 'reading closely' but we don't need to get into that"
connecting teachers to resources to see what work with literature looks like
trying to think about how to connect our standards with those other resources
work on the glossary: make it more useful, more dynamic so teachers use it as a integral part of the framework
Noyce: is there a standard amount of reading? pages at grade level
Tenth grade reading things about range of reading, complexity of reading
response: asking students to read closely is often misinterpreted as asking students to only read short chunks of texts
percentage of students' time that should be spent on types of texts
Peyser: to some extent there's the standards themselves, then there's the introductory material to put some of it in context that you may not get if you're just going through standard by standard
response: not just how we frame it in words, but how we give access in terms of technology