REPORT FROM THE 2011 APWH READING IN COLORADO

6/18/2011 - A Tweet from the head of CB with the breakdown in scores for this year's APWH exam:

9.4% = 5

16.0%= 4

23.1% = 3

25.7% = 2

25.8% = 1

Hello all,

I am a TL on the Comparative Question this year (the rise of empires).

109 TLs this year and over 1000 readers! Last year for us in Colorado, so it is bittersweet.

Thus far most of the questions seem to be having no surprises.

Students were writing the comparative question more than usual, and fewer attempted the CCOT.

More theses attempts out there too, which is nice, but still obvious inaccuracies - Aztecs with quipu, Bantu migrating after 1750, etc.

This is what I have heard about the rubrics of the various questions:

DBQ

• Thesis - 1 cause and 2 consequences of the Green Revolution
• 3 groups of documents (or two with subgroups)
• Evidence point is still hard for students - tying it to the thesis/question
• 1 POV but a higher bar explaining the why
• 1 Additional document and of course to defend it with a good explanation, but so few attempted - even to ask for a document from a farmer or Africa with an explanation would have sufficed!

CCOT - many students are not addressing correct migrations (wrong time period, non-humans, etc.)

• Allowing migration from Africa to the Americas or any other such migration (of humans) from one region to another)
• No major surprises otherwise, though continuities is the challenge as always

COMP

• Need similarity and difference about the rise of empires in the thesis
• Need similarity and difference about the rise of empires for addressing all parts
• Need another comparison beside those two (so three comparisons total), but can be about empires, not necessarily a rise
• 4 points of evidence, at least one of those addressing a rise, but for two points at least two for each, though need at least one piece of evidence for either empire to get one point
• Analysis of a comparison - so a reason for a similarity or difference

Here is the so-called "Morning Report" by Monty Armstrong (APWH list-serve administrator), a tradition on the APWH list serve during the reading.

Tuesday June 7, 2011

The DBQ was authored by John McNeil thus the environmental theme. The CCOT and the Comp, IMHO, were designed to bridge the old test and the new one. Broader questions into which the students could put their own examples. Even though the Comp restricted choices, we were not looking for any specific evidence, just any evidence connected to rise.

The QL session focused more specifically on the questions. For the DBQ at this point the adjusted mean score is 3.85, 3.36 without adjusting. Analysis is becoming less of a problem but thesis PoV and the missing document are still problematic. Although the question calls for both causes and consequences, the low bar for thesis was one cause and two consequences. They only had to provide one PoV and the documents presented very few problems.

For the CCOT the adjusted mean is 2.7 (1.3 without - lots of dashes!) with a fairly high bar thesis. The student had to be specific about the change and continuity with which they were working. One of the main problems is the time frame. They had a great deal of information, much of which was outside the time frame. Bantu migrations??????

For the Comp, I have said enough but the adjusted mean for the questions was 2.98 (2.32 without adjusting, still some dashes).

The one item for all three of these questions that can be a focus for the secondary teachers is a simple one Are the students answering the question they are being asked? Not in terms of evidence so much as simply reading the question and responding to it. When it says change and continuity are those items in their answer?

A much more detailed report will be made by the Chief Reader and will be posted on AP Central.

Monday June 6, 2011

The Reading progresses well, but the same problems continue. The one overarching problem, given the difference in the three essays, is that students still cannot create a thesis statement. I am reminded of the old joke about the man who walks up to a fellow in New York and asks, “How do I get to Carnegie Hall?” The man’s response is, “Practice, practice, practice.” I think the same can be said for thesis statements. For models you have the samples from College Board. You can also take those samples and create a quiz which asks the students which statements would get credit for a thesis and which would not.

Last night’s talk was by Prof. Candice Goucher of Washington State University and the title was “Consuming Passions: Cooks, Cannibals, and World Historians.” I found it to be very interesting. It was a study of the connection between pryotechnology (cooking and metal working) and the assignment of gender roles within African societies. I would go into more depth but other people who are on the list were there and I would that they would offer up their views. (And for those of you interested in this facet of world history I would offer up _ Catching Fire: How Cooking Made Us Human by Richard W. Wrangham_.)

Sunday June 5, 2011

Talked last night with friends who are reading the other two essays and although I am going to get more expanded comments, here are some items in brief.

The DBQ is reading well with most students handling the question fairly well. The major sticking points continue to be thesis, PoV, and the missing document. My friends, especially those of whom have rest the DBQ for 3-5 years tell me that the level of skill continues to rise over the years. Cheers for you secondary folks out there.

For the CCOT as with the Comp, many students have a good grasp of the facts but they fall down when it comes to discussing the terms of the question. They do not put those facts into the framework of “Change and Continuity.” And as with the Comp, they continue to struggle with thesis and analysis. (I am not going to put T&A in here because I got just too many rude, albeit funny, comments yesterday.)

Just to give you and idea of what we are attempting to do. If you do the math, each Reader reads 600 +/- essays on average, which works out to be a stack almost four feet high. Imagine finding that on your desk!

Saturday June 4, 2011

Yesterday was the first full day of “live” booklets”, meaning the scores are going to count. Although I cannot speak yet for the other questions, I would say that the two things missing from the Comp answers are T&A (no snickering, I mean Thesis and Analysis!) The students who answered the question correctly, and they are in the vast majority, still need to work on the thesis statement. They need to answer the question in those first three sentences. The one exception being the really good essays which start with a great word picture or dramatic intro but still get the thesis done before moving on to the next paragraph. A reasonable percentage of writers manage to save themselves with a thesis statement in the conclusion, but most students are still struggling with a thesis statement.

There other major item is analysis. WHY are the two empires similar in their rise? We have broad in our conception of what rise consists but students are still having trouble.

Most students attempted the answer the prompt correctly but as always, some did not. They wrote about the fall of empire, attempted to compare all five empires to each other, or started with one comparison (Aztecs to Mali) and then in the body of the essay discussed the Aztecs and the Mongols

Friday June 3, 2011

We broke into questions groups and after a brief training by the QLs, we all departed to our yurts. As is true of both WHAP and when I read Euro, the first day is spent going over sample essays, dealing with questions, and having everyone become “one with the rubric.”

Thursday June 2, 2011

The Readers arrived last night and today we will be starting the process of the Reading. There is the general meeting with the usual greetings, directions, etc. The Readers will then be broken into their question groups, about 50% on the DBQ and 25 and 25 for the CCOT and the Comp. The initial training will be in these larger groups and then we will break into table groups, about eight people per table and the TL. This first day is spent training the Readers how to score using the rubric and hammering out the details and individual questions. We may well spend the entire day making sure that every sample is scored correctly before going on to the real essays. It is not enough that every Reader at the table gave the sample a 5, it has to be for the same reasons. That way every essay will receive the score it deserves, for better or worse. Also, especially for the new Readers, if gives a chance to see the whole range of student writing, not just what they see on a day-to-day basis in their individual classrooms.

Teaching hint-This is why you use the sample essays with your students. Your best writers may be the top of your class, but are they the top of 180,000 other students? The students need to be aware of the level of competition they are facing. They also need to see how the rubrics interface with the essays to produce a score.

Wednesday, June 1, 2011

As to the Reading. For those of unfamiliar with the process, let me give you a brief overview. The pink answer booklets (180,000+ this year!) Arrive at ETS in Princeton where those good folks select random samples to be sent to CSU. The leadership team, including the Question Leader and the sample selectors go through and begin to refine the rubric and assemble a selection of essays for the Table Leaders to read and discuss and further refine the rubric. By the end of the day today we will have both a set rubric and a selection of samples to use to train the Readers, who start arriving today. If you are wondering, this NOT a process of the people at the top saying, “Here is the rubric and the samples, now look them over.” It is sometimes a very contentious process with changes being made through out the two days.

As a classroom teacher, you can be assured that the rubric reflects not only the prompt but also how the students responded to the prompt. There is not pre-set rubric other than the generic core-scoring guide with which you are all familiar. The details of the rubric are hammered out her at CSU to create the operational rubrics

Tuesday, May 31, 2011

Gooooooood Morning Neighbors

This is my annual Morning Farm Report on the Reading. For those of you new to the list the Morning Farm Report started when we were in Lincoln, Nebraska, at UNL. The title was based on our location and the fact the my grand-father, who made his living in agriculture, used to listen (on the radio) every morning to the “Morning Farm Report.” When we moved to Colorado I thought about changing the title but a local teacher reminded me that Colorado has a great deal of farming, so the title remained. The purpose of this daily missive is to keep you informed of the activities at and the progress of the Reading.

Well, we are assembling again in Fort Collins, Colorado for the Reading. Almost 1,000 people will start reading the essays beginning June 2nd. For today and tomorrow about 100 Table Leaders (we read in groups of 6 to eight at a table and each table has an experienced Reader known as, you guessed it, the Table Leader) and others begin the work of reading sample essays and determining the rubric for each question. This year I am working on the comparative question but I will be talking to other Readers and getting in formation on the other questions.

Outside of the winds yesterday (clocked in some places at 60 mph) the weather is supposed to be great, high 70s to low 80s during the day and low 50s at night. Well, we shall see.