Hunter Collegect/ScarletN/LitReview.doc · Web viewVariations on a blue guitar. New York, NY: ... XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX teach students to monitor their own word ... Clinical

Hunter College Masters in Literacy Program Program Review Document

COVER SHEETAdvanced Reading Education

International Reading Association

Please include one copy of this cover sheet with each program report.

SUBMITTED BY: Deborah Eldridge (Name of Institution) Hunter College (Address)

DATE: 9/15/02 695 Park Ave., #1023 West; New York, NY 10021

CHIEF COMPILER: Deborah Eldridge PHONE: (212) 772-4775

DATE OF ON-SITE VISIT: Spring 2004

Name of program offered for review in this document: Masters of Science in Literacy (Birth to Grade 6)

Classification: Level(s) offered for review in this document: Administration Baccalaureate Pre-School/Pre-K Post-Baccalaureate, Initial Program K-12 Education Masters, Initial Program Kindergarten __X Advanced Masters Early Childhood Specialist Elementary Education Doctorate Middle School Education Other (specify): Secondary Education X Combined (specify): Birth through Grade 6 includes pre-school, early childhood and elementary education Support Services Other (specify):

Checklist of materials to be enclosed with this program review document: X Overview and scope, including the following:

_X__(1) Explanation of the knowledge base, philosophy for preparation, and goals and objectives of the program(s).

_X__(2) Candidate course of studies with all required courses clearly marked._X__(3) Descriptions of field experiences and internships. Include the amount of time and the type of supervision._X__(4) Explanation of how the program may deviate from the program standards._X__(5) Description of where the program is located within the professional education unit and its

interrelationships with other programs in the unit and the university/college._X__(6) List of faculty with primary assignments in the advanced reading programs. Provide rank, responsibilities,

and tenure status. Indicate area of preparation. (Do not send vitae.)_X__(7) Number of graduates from the program(s) at different levels over the past three years._X _(8) Criteria used at admission to post-baccalaureate programs to determine if the candidate has adequate

academic background in the subject to be taught should be submitted.

X Matrix for each advanced reading education program, including an indication of the competency levels addressed by each course cited.

X Reading and reading-related course descriptions and syllabi. For example, if a course is used to meet a competency, please include a syllabus for that course.

X “Program Information Sheet” (complete the next page)

Submit with IRA Program Review Document Advanced Reading ProgramsIRA Program Standards

1


I verify that the information provided in this program review document is accurate and true:

________Deborah Eldridge ___________________Signature Name (please print)

Coordinator, Masters in Literacy Program (212) 772-4775 Position Telephone

Hunter College, School of Education, Department of Curriculum and Teaching, Address

695 Park Ave., #1023 West ; New York, NY 10021


2


PROGRAM INFORMATION SHEETAdvanced Programs for Reading Professionals

I. Specific Programs and Credit Hour Allocations

Listed below are the three program levels of training approved by NCATE. Check the left-hand column if your institution offers that specific program. List the credit hours required in reading and reading-related courses in the right-hand column.

Programs Credit Hours

X Advanced: Reading Specialist (Role 6) 34 to 37

Advanced: Reading Coordinator (Role 7)

Advanced: Teacher Educator (Doctorate) (Role 8)

II. Overview and Scope of the Program

In narrative form, describe the reading program at your institution and how that program fulfills the program standards for reading professionals. Include a list of faculty members with responsibilities in the program(s), the general objectives of the program(s), and other items listed on the cover sheet.

III. Course Descriptions

List all reading and reading-related courses included on the matrix that in some way meet the competencies on the matrix. Include course number, course title, course description and credit-hour allocation. It may be that the catalog description of the course will fulfill this requirement. If a syllabus would help the reader understand a course, please include it.

MATRIX OF COMPETENCIES OF CANDIDATES

The matrix that follows lists the competencies for the categories of specialized reading professionals. Prepare a separate matrix and program documents for each role being reviewed. In the space to the right of each competency, indicate the performance data, experiences, and courses that meet each competency. Course names and course numbers should be listed here. List also performance data such as descriptions of video- and audio-tapes used for practice lessons; supervisory evaluations of practicum experiences; candidate portfolios; candidate journals, parent evaluations, composite standardized test results, etc.

Show the competency levels in the next column according to descriptors listed below. The International Reading Association’s publication, Standards for Reading Professionals (revised, 1998), contains IRA’s suggested levels of proficiency for specialized reading professionals.Levels of ProficiencyA – Awareness

Has awareness of the different aspects of literacy development and related teaching procedures.B – Basic UnderstandingHas knowledge about specific instructional tasks and has fundamental proficiency in the performance of those tasks for the aspect of literacy development.C – Comprehensive Undertanding

Is able to apply proficiently broad, in-depth knowledge of the different aspects of literacy development in instructional settings.O – Not Applicable


3


Conceptual Framework of Hunter College School of Education Hunter College was established in 1870 as an all-female Normal School, devoted exclusively to the education of young women preparing to teach. Thomas Hunter, president during the first 37 years, opened wide the doors to all qualified women, irrespective of race, religion or ethnic background, flying in the face of the common practices prevailing at the time. Created by the NY State legislature, Hunter was deemed the only approved credentialing program for those seeking to teach in NYC. Hunter grew along with the city’s increasing need for teachers. Through the remarkable efforts of Thomas Hunter during his 37-year tenure, Hunter came to be known for its:

Impartiality regarding race, religion, ethnicity or financial/political favoritism Championing of high quality higher education for women, High entry requirements (demonstration of high personal merit) Substantive and rigorous academics.

Our simply stated purpose, to prepare excellent educators and allied professionals for New York City Schools, captures neither the dimensions nor the importance of the work we do. Our vision is to prepare excellent educators who make a difference in the lives of their students, colleagues, schools, and communities. The mission of the HC School of Education is to prepare educators and allied professionals for teaching and learning in urban schools and other urban educational settings, kindling teacher candidates’ enthusiasms for learning, their own as well as their students’. This mission encompasses:

• forging a multi-dimensional respect for learners; • deepening a commitment to social justice;• providing depth of knowledge and breadth of pedagogical skill;• developing ongoing engagement as professionals.

Nestled in the urban context of New York City, our work centers on nurturing an enlivening zest for learning in children and youth, teacher candidates, and HC faculty. We prepare teacher candidates for the urban schools of New York City and its environs. Today’s urban schools display a number of distinctive characteristics (Weiner, 2000) and we prepare teacher candidates to meet these in a spirit of challenge and opportunity:

Today’s urban schools serve a large, highly diverse population of learners, families, and communities. Hunter’s programs highlight understanding and respect for diversity and responsiveness to learners and their communities.

Today’s urban schools are chronically under-funded. Hunter’s teacher candidates are prepared to be resilient and creative problem solvers, pursuing social justice and educational equity.

Today’s urban schools include significant populations of children from “voluntary” linguistic and other “involuntary” minority communities (Ogbu, 1987). Hunter’s programs incorporate principles of second language learning, understanding of diversity of race, ethnicity, culture and of disabilities. In addition, we offer a bilingual extension to several graduate programs.

In today’s urban schools, standardized measures of “intelligence” and achievement dominate and often determine curriculum, instruction, and the classification of learners. Issues surrounding assessment, school organization, and the purposes of education are addressed in Hunter’s programs of study.

At the center of our work is the nurturing of an active zest for learning. “Zest” implies engagement, motivation, personal effort, active involvement -- and is a highly-valued wellspring in children and youth, teacher candidates, and HC faculty. Zest is essential to high levels of

Overview and Scope Hunter College Masters in Literacy4


student achievement, deeper levels of comprehension, and, of course, lifelong learning. Such aliveness is palpable in teachers’ enthusiasm for subject matter, our instructional energy, our devotion to improving what we do, and our imagining possibilities for what, together, we might do.

Explanation of the Knowledge Baseof the Masters in Literacy Program at Hunter College

In addition to the conceptual framework of the School of Education, the knowledge base for the Masters in Literacy Program was guided in its design, during the New York state mandated re-registration of teacher education programs in 2000-2001 (state regulations are included in Appendix C), by the Standards for Reading Professionals established by the International Reading Association (1998). It was also informed by the professional judgment of the faculty who are scholars and researchers in the field (Balmuth, 1992; Eldridge et al, in review; Mercado, 2002: Romero, 2002; Smith, 2000, in press). The particular needs of and emphasis on urban education was informed by the work of Weiner (2000). Additionally, the knowledge base was developed with the understanding that knowledge occurs in three areas of knowledge-for-practice, knowledge-of-practice, and knowledge-in-practice (Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 2001). The courses, content, and competencies of the Hunter College Masters in Literacy Program are built upon shared core beliefs and values about literacy, children, and teachers. The core beliefs that guide the coursework in the program are: The goal of literacy is to produce lifelong learners (amongst teachers and students) who use

literacy to meet their needs and purposes; and is reflected in competencies and methods of evaluation throughout the program.

Literacy is a dynamic, social process of speaking, listening, reading and writing that involves discourse practices, values and beliefs acquired at home and learned in school (Street, 1990; Gee, 1994); and is reflected in coursework in early literacy, language literacy and learning, children’s literature, and embedded orientations to content in many other courses.

Literacy skills can (and should) be instructed, experienced and learned in many different ways to meet multiple needs and purposes (Allington & Cunningham, 2002); and is reflected in coursework in instructional approaches, writing, literacy within the disciplines, remediation and the organization of literacy programs.

Involvement of and communication with families, communities, supplemental service providers and professional colleagues is essential in supporting the literacy development and meeting the learning needs of diverse children within urban settings (Epstein, 2000); and is reflected in modules in special needs adaptations and coursework in leadership, diagnosis, assessment and embedded competencies and methods of evaluation in many other courses.

Diversities in all forms (including exceptionalities and giftedness) at many levels and in many contexts are strengths that should be built upon for effective literacy learning to occur (Sleeter, 2001); and are reflected throughout the program in competencies, methods of evaluation, and orientations to content.

Assessment is the foundation upon which instruction, curriculum design, and program development should be based (Stiggins, 2002); and is reflected in coursework in assessment, diagnosis, instructional approaches, leadership, and embedded in competencies and methods of evaluation in other courses.



Philosophy for preparation The Hunter College Masters in Literacy program is also guided in its design by values about pedagogy in graduate education. The values held by the Masters in Literacy program are reflected in the content of and approaches to the coursework: Competencies are built through multiple exposures, experiences, and opportunities to apply

knowledge across a number of contexts and are measured at the height of integration in specific courses and transition point evaluations (Lanier & Little, 1986).

Professionalism is modeled, discussed, and supported through introduction to professional associations, journals, and activities that foster professional growth and development in a variety of contexts and at multiple levels of involvement (Grossman et al, 2001).

Theoretical and research-based knowledge is foundational but revisited frequently through critique, application and analysis in a variety of contexts and from a diversity of perspectives (Shulman, 1987; Darling-Hammond & Cobb, 1996).

Integration is the most effective manner to support professional growth in practice in the areas of assessment, challenges of diversity, aesthetics and technology when foundational knowledge has been established (Greene, 2002).

Goals and Objectives of the Program Finally, in addition to national standards and the literature base for reading professionals the design of the Masters in Literacy Program was guided by features of excellence in effective teacher education programs (Harmon, et al, 2001) with input and feedback from colleagues. Those features (in bold) were further elaborated by the faculty of the Masters in Literacy Program and are congruent with the conceptual framework of the School of Education: An articulated vision of producing knowledgeable, skillful, sensitive, and reflective urban

literacy educators who acknowledge the power of literacy proficiency to grant or limit one’s access to societal goods and services.

A shared mission to educate master teachers who are prepared to respond to the diversity and complexity of the range of issues and challenges confronting literacy learners in urban settings.

An apprenticeship model that supports and collaborates with teachers in developing their competencies through structured experiences with whole class, small group, and individual settings of literacy learning.

A focus on professional identity development that is grounded in a personal vision of oneself as a member of a professional community of lifelong learners who test and validate their understanding of themselves as literacy educators through dialogue, reflection and participation in professional associations and activities.

A demonstrated sensitivity to diversity in which language development and literacy learning instruction, curriculum, materials, and programs reflect and value each individual’s ethnic, linguistic and cultural experiences, needs, and priorities.

Utilizing standards in order to guide decision making in the analysis, evaluation, and design of literacy environments, curriculum, materials and programs.

Delivering broad-based content that prepares skillful practitioner-leaders who demonstrate their knowledge of processes, products, and practices through exemplary literacy instruction, curriculum development, materials selection, and program design.

Meeting individual needs through proficiency in adapting, organizing, and communicating about literacy to best meet the needs of diverse learners including those with exceptionalities and giftedness.



Masters in Literacy Program Candidate Course of Study The following chart contains the course of study for the Masters in Literacy Program at Hunter College. All courses are required.

Course Title Hours/ Credits

Pre-requisites Co-requisites Field Experiences/Practicum

ECC 704.FW Language and Literacy in Early Childhood Education: Birth through 2nd

grade

45/3 None EDLIT 739.01 Delays in Early Language and Literacy Development in Young Children with Special Needs

10 hours in an early literacy setting, at least five hours of which must be in either an inclusive program or a program with a special needs focus.

EDLIT 730 Language, Literacy and Learning in School Contexts: Grades 1 through 6.

45/3 None None 15 hours in a classroom analyzing language use of ESL learners

EDLIT 731Literacy Assessment: Birth through Grade 6

45/3 None None 15 hours in a classroom assessing diverse learners.

EDLIT 732 Children's literature: Birth through grade 6

45/3 None None 5 hours in a classroom-based dramatic demonstration

EDLIT 733 Theories and Process of Teaching Writing: Pre-K through grade 6.

45/3 EDLIT 731 None 15 hours observing and analyzing writing development.

EDLIT 734 Literacies within the Disciplines: K through grade 6

45/3 EDLIT 731 EDLIT 739.03 Special Needs Issues in Literacies within the Curriculum

10 hours in a classroom focused on older learners (grade 3 to 6) and content area literacy.

EDLIT 735 Instructional Approaches to Literacy: K through grade 6

45/3 EDLIT 731 EDLIT 739.02 Adaptations and Modifications in Approaches to Literacy for Students with Special Needs.

15 hours in a classroom adapting instruction, materials, and/or curricula for enrichment, ESL or special needs learners.

EDLIT 736 Diagnosis of Reading Difficulties

45/3 EDLIT 731 None 15 hours of diagnosis, under supervision, of students with reading difficulties.

EDLIT 737 Practicum in Remedial Reading

45/3 EDLIT 736 None 20 hours of remediation, under supervision, of students with reading difficulties

EDLIT 738 Literacy Programs: Organization and Resources

45/3 EDLIT 737 None 15 hours of survey for the enhancement of literacy programs.

EDLIT 739.01 Delays in Early Language and Literacy Development in Young Children with Special Needs

15/1 As noted with the co-requisite course

ECC 721 As noted in the experience with the co-requisite course.

EDLIT 739.02 Special Needs Issues in Literacies within the Curriculum


EDLIT 734 As noted in the experience with the co-requisite course.

EDLIT 739.03 Adaptations and Modifications in Approaches to Literacy for Students with Special Needs


EDLIT 735 As noted in the experience with the co-requisite course.

EDLIT 740 Leadership in Literacy

45/3 A minimum of 27 credits in the Masters in Literacy Program

None Culminating Experience

EDLIT 741Practicum

15/1 15 to 18 credits in the Masters in Literacy Program

None Supervised practicum with 25 hours at the early childhood level and 25 hours at the childhood level.

Totals:11 with 3 modules

555 hours37 credits

4 courses w/o prerequisites

3 courses with co-requisites

185 hours



Description of Field Experiences As indicated in the preceding course of study chart, the Masters in Literacy Program contains field experiences embedded into every course for a total of 185 hours. These experiences exceed the requirements of the New York state regulations (included in Appendix C) for permanent certification of literacy masters candidates. A total of 85 hours are directly supervised by college faculty in diagnosis (EDLIT 736), remediation (EDLIT 737), and the practicum (EDLIT 741) for a total of 7 credit hours. 100 field experience hours are indirectly supervised by the Masters in Literacy faculty through course assignments, child case studies with the submission of language and writing samples, observation logs, and video taping of instruction. Throughout the Masters in Literacy Program the performance-based products developed during the field experiences are collected into a professional portfolio that is reflected upon and presented to the Masters in Literacy Faculty by the teacher candidate at key transition points in the program. Transition point evaluations of candidate competency are assessed at the 18-20 credit (pre-clinical), 27-30 credit (post-clinical), and exit/graduation points in the program course of study. Rubrics for the assessment of candidates’ field experiences are presented in each course syllabus, if developed. Rubrics for the evaluation of candidates’ portfolios at each of the transition points are included in Appendix B.

Explanation of Program Deviation from Standards The Hunter College Masters in Literacy Program does not deviate from the standards as set forth in the Standards for Reading Professionals of the International Reading Association. However, additional standards and requirements are embedded in the program that address New York State regulations for the Masters in Literacy Program (included in Appendix C), the Hunter College School of Education conceptual framework, and NCATE standards for teacher education programs in general. It is important to note that the new Masters in Literacy Program began in September of 2001. Thus, only the four foundational courses (and one co-requisite) have been taught as of September 2002 when this document was submitted. The remaining courses have been planned, but not implemented, and this is reflected in the transitional assessment plan included in Appendix A.

Description of program location and interrelationships with other programs The Hunter College School of Education offers a wide variety of Masters programs including, but not limited to, Early Childhood, Childhood Education, Science Education, Mathematics Education, TESOL, Adolescence Education and Special Education with a variety of specialization concentrations. Amongst them, the Masters in Literacy Program is one of only three programs available to elementary school teachers who are already provisionally certified by New York State. HCSOE had offered an 18 credit reading specialist certificate program as an optional extension to the general Masters in Elementary Education since 1964. However, no new students have been admitted to this program since fall 2000 and in fall 2003 this program will be discontinued. In 2000 revised New York state regulations replaced the reading specialist certificate program with a Masters in Literacy Program to prepare literacy specialist teachers birth through grade 6. This new Masters in Literacy Program is the program seeking national recognition through NCATE. Although the early literacy course (ECC 704. FW) is housed in the early childhood masters program, one section enrolls exclusively Masters in Literacy students (because of the field experience component) and is taught by Masters in Literacy faculty.



Masters in Literacy Program Faculty The Masters in Literacy faculty are presented in alphabetical order.

Name Rank Area of Preparation

Tenure Status

Primary Assignments

Miriam Balmuth Full Professor, retiring in spring 2003. New hire in Fall 2002 at the assistant level will teach these courses.

History of literacy, reading clinic coordinator

Tenured EDLIT 735EDLIT 738

Judith Bader-Zucker Adjunct Professor Diagnosis & Remediation

Non-tenured EDLIT 736EDLIT 737

Deborah Eldridge Associate Professor Early LiteracyLeadership

Tenure pending

ECC 704EDLIT 740

Yang Hu Assistant Professor AssessmentWriting

Tenure bearing

EDLIT 731EDLIT 733

Carmen Mercado Full Professor Language and Literacy

Tenured EDLIT 730

Migdalia Romero Full Professor Literacy across the disciplines

Tenured EDLIT 734

Alene Smith Associate Professor Children's Literacy

Tenured EDLIT 732

Verena Valck Adjunct Professor Special Education

Non-tenured EDLIT 739

All full-time MA in Literacy faculty

Supervision EDLIT 741

Graduate History The Hunter College Masters in Literacy Program accepted its first 40 candidates in the fall of 2001. Presently there are fall and spring admissions of 25 candidates at each admissions point. At the time when this document is submitted, fall 2002, there will be not be any graduates of the program. However, the following chart demonstrates candidates’ progress through the literacy program course of study and anticipates the graduation dates of the current and expected candidates. Transition point evaluations and graduations are completed at the conclusion of the semester indicated.



Chart of anticipated transition points andgraduation dates of entering teacher candidate cohorts

Fall 02 Spring 03

Fall 03 Spring 04

Fall 04 Spring 05

Fall 05

18-20 credit review

Fall 2001

cohort (40)

Spring 2002

Cohort(25)

Fall 2002

cohort(25)

Spring 2003

Cohort(25)

Fall 2003

cohort(25)

Spring 2004

cohort(25)

Fall 2004

cohort(25)

27-30 creditreview

Fall 2001

cohort(40)

Spring 2002

cohort(25)

Fall 2002

cohort(25)

Spring 2003

Cohort(25)

Fall 2003

cohort(25)

Culminating

project

Fall 2001

cohort(40)

Spring 2002

cohort(25)

Fall 2002

cohort(25)

Spring 2003

Cohort(25)

Grad-uation

Fall 2001

cohort(40)

Spring 2002

cohort(25)

Fall 2002

cohort(25)

Spring 2003

Cohort(25)

Admission Criteria The following criteria for admission are excerpted from the state regulations and are available on the Masters in Literacy Program website (http://hunter.cuny.edu/~ct/LitWebpage). When applications for admission are received in the admissions department of Hunter College, they are screened for completeness. At that time the admissions department advises candidates of missing components and invites them to complete their applications prior to further consideration. Within a week following the application deadline, the Literacy Program Coordinator screens completed applications for minimal requirements for admission to the Masters in Literacy program. Candidates who do not meet minimal requirements are informed by the admissions department of the rejection of their applications to the Literacy Program. Candidates who meet minimal requirements are then invited to submit an on-site writing sample. On-site writing samples are administered by the Office of Educational Services in the School of Education. A committee consisting of the program coordinator and two other members of the Masters in Literacy faculty judge the writing samples according to the rubric included in Appendix B and review the complete applications. Admission Review Forms (sample included in Appendix B) document the committee’s decisions. Admission to the Masters in Literacy program is extremely competitive. Final decisions are made by consensus of the reviewing faculty.A. Matriculation Requirements

1) Undergraduate degree with a G. P. A. of 2.8 (minimum).2) NYS teacher certification in Early Childhood Education, Childhood Education, Special

Education, or proof of passing scores on all required New York State teacher certification examinations in addition to completion of an approved New York State teacher education program in Early Childhood, Childhood or Special Education.

3) Completion of a satisfactory on-site writing sample as part of the application process.


http://hunter.cuny.edu/~ct/LitWebpage


4) Submission of a letter of recommendation from a supervisor to be included in the application.

5) Applicants whose initial certification was or will be obtained prior to February 2, 2004 (when the new New York State teacher education regulations go into effect) must provide evidence of coursework in assessment and educational technology, with passing grades, as reflected in undergraduate and/or graduate transcripts and course catalog descriptions. Applicants who do not meet this requirement may be considered for non-matriculant status.

B. Non-matriculant Status Requirements1. Applicants who have an undergraduate GPA between 2.5 and 2.79 but who have

completed a masters degree with a GPA of at least 3.5 may be considered for non-matriculant status.

2. Teachers certified (in Early Childhood or Childhood Education) in other than New York State can be accepted into the Masters in Literacy Program on a non-matriculated basis and take up to 12 credits while seeking reciprocal certification in New York State.

3. Applicants who do not meet the criteria of foundational coursework in assessment and/or educational technology may be considered on a non-matriculated basis until they either obtain a passing grade in EDC 714 (Advanced Educational Technology) and/or EDF 716 (Assessment of the Teaching-Learning Process); or demonstrate equivalent competence to Hunter College instructors of assessment and/or educational technology courses selected by the relevant department chair(s).

C. Change in Status from Non-matriculated to Matriculated1) Those applicants who are accepted as non-matriculants should apply for matriculation

during the semester in which they complete 9-12 credits of Literacy courses if they have obtained NYS Initial Teacher Certification and completed the foundational coursework as described in A-5 and B-3 above. Students must have achieved an overall grade point average of at least 3.0 within the program.

2) Non-matriculated students who do not meet these criteria may not continue to enroll in courses.

Reference ListAllington, R. L., & Cunningham, P. M. (2002). Schools that work: Where all children read and

write. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Balmuth, M. (1992). The Roots of Phonics. Baltimore, MD: York Press.Balmuth, M. (1995). The Hope of Our Humanity: Beginnings of the Teacher Education Program

at Hunter College, 1870. Unpublished manuscript, Hunter College of the City University of New York.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2001). Relationships of knowledge and practice: Teacher learning in communities. In A. Iran-Nudged, & Pearson, P. D. (Ed.), Review of research in education. (Vol. 24). Washington, D. C.: American Educational Research Association.

Darling-Hammond, L., & Cobb, V. L. (1996). The changing context of teacher education. In F. B. Murray (Ed.), The teacher educator's handbook: Buillding a knowledge base for the preparation of teachers, (pp. 14-62). Thousand Oaks, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Eldridge, D., Maloch, B., Flint, A. S., Loven, R., Fine, J., Bryant-Shanklin, M., Harmon, J., & Martinez, M. (in review). Teacher education matters: A follow-up study of excellence in reading teacher preparation. Reading Research Quarterly.



Eldridge, D., Fine, J., & Bryant-Shanklin, M. (in review). To educate, or not to educate: pre-service teacher education program graduates' responses to highly prescriptive teaching situations. Journal of Literacy Research.

Epstein, J. L. (2001). School and family partnerships: Preparing educators and improving schools. Boulder, CO: Westview.

Gee, J. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies. London: Taylor & Francis..Greene, M. (2002). Variations on a blue guitar. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001). Toward a theory of teacher community.

Teachers College Record, 103(6), 942-1012.Harmon, J., Hedrick, W., Martinez, M., Perez, B., Keehn, S., Fine, J. C., Eldridge, D., Flint, A.

S., Littleton, D. M., Bryant-Shanklin, M., Loven, R., Assaf, L., & Sailors, M. (2001). Features of excellence of reading teacher preparation programs. In J. Hoffman, Schallert, D. L., Fairbanks, C. M., Worthy, J., Maloch, B. (Ed.), Fiftieth yearbook of the National Reading Conference. (pp. 262-274). Chicago, IL: National Reading Conference.

Lanier, J. E., & Little, J. W. (1986). Research on teacher education. In M. C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching (3 ed., pp. 527-569). NY: MacMillan.

Mercado, C. (2002). The learner: "Race," "ethnicity, and linguistic difference. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Research on Teaching. Washington, D. C.: American Educational Research Association.

Ogbu, J. (1987). Variability in minority school performance: A problem in search of an explanation. Anthropology and Education Quarterly, 18, 312-334.

Romero, M. (2002). Reviewing language loss in a multicultural setting: A native language enhancement program and its impact. In T. Osborn (Ed.), The future of foreign language education in the United States.

Shulman, L. (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of the new reform. Harvard Educational Review, 57, 1-22.

Sleeter, C. (2001). Preparing teachers for culturally diverse schools: Research and the overwhelming presence of whiteness. Journal of Teacher Education, 52 (2), 94-106.

Smith, A. (in review). Giving voice to our stories. A chapter written for the Higher Education Collaborative at Lincoln Center Institute.

Smith, A. (2000). Folk tales and quilt theme books in children’s literature: A way of communicating culture. Pennsylvania Reads, 1 (2), 24-28.

Smith, A. (1990). Folk tales: A first step to understanding literature. Indiana Reading Quarterly, 22 (2), 6-13.

Stiggins, R. (2002). Assessment crisis: The absence of assessment FOR learning. Phi Delta Kappan, 83 (10), 758-765.

Weiner, L. (2002). Research in the 90s: Implications for Urban Teacher Preparation. Review of Educational Research, 70 (3), 369-406.



Program Standards and MatrixSpecialized Reading ProfessionalInternational Reading Association

X Role 6 Role 7 Role 8

Program StandardsEvidence: performance data,

experiences, coursesInstitution’s competency

level (A,B,or C)KNOWLEDGE AND BELIEFS ABOUT READING1.0 Theoretical BaseThe reading professional will: 1.1 demonstrate recognition that reading

should be taught as a process;ECC 704-Early Literacy: On-line Journal Responses

C

1.2 demonstrate an understanding and respect for cultural, linguistic, and ethnic diversity in the teaching process;

EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Language Study

C

1.3 demonstrate an understanding of the importance of literacy for personal and social growth;

EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Interactive Journal

C

1.4 illustrate that literacy can be a means for transmitting moral and cultural values;

ECC 704-Early Literacy: National Reading Panel critique

C

1.5 demonstrate an understanding of reading as the process of constructing meaning through the interaction of the reader’s existing knowledge, the information suggested by the written language, and the context of the reading situation;

EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Instructional Application (Thematic Unit)

C

1.6 demonstrate an understanding of the major theories of language development, cognition, and learning; and

ECC 704-Early Literacy: text analysis C

1.7 demonstrate an understanding of the impact of physical, perceptual, emotional, social, cultural, environmental, and intellectual factors on learning, language development, and reading acquisition.

EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Interactive Journal and Language Study

C

2.0 Knowledge BaseThe reading professional will: 2.1 demonstrate an understanding that

written language is a symbolic system;EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Interactive Journal

C

2.2 demonstrate an understanding of the interrelation of language and literacy acquisition;

ECC 704-Early Literacy: Journal Responses, Materials Evaluation and/or Literacy Box

C

2.3 demonstrate an understanding of principles of new language acquisition;

EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Interactive Journal

C

2.4 demonstrate an understanding of phonemic, morphemic, semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic systems of

EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Interactive Journal and Language Study

C

A – Awareness B – Basic Understanding C – Comprehensive Understanding O – Not Applicable

IRA Standards Matrix Hunter College Masters in Literacy13


X Role 6 Role 7 Role 8

Program StandardsEvidence: performance data,

experiences, coursesInstitution’s competency

level (A,B,or C)language and their relation to the reading and writing process;

2.5 demonstrate an understanding of the interrelation of reading and writing, and listening and speaking;

EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Interactive Journal and Instructional Application (Thematic Unit)

C

2.6 show that students need opportunities to integrate their use of literacy through reading, writing, listening, speaking, viewing, and representing visually;

ECC 704-Early Literacy: Literacy Box or material evaluation

C

2.7 demonstrate an understanding of emergent literacy and the experiences that support it;

ECC 704-Early Literacy: Text Analysis C

2.8 demonstrate an understanding of the role of metacognition in reading and writing, and listening and speaking;

EDLIT 742-Practicum: Self-reflection, video observation, and journal

C

2.9 demonstrate an understanding of how contextual factors in the school can influence student learning and reading (e.g., grouping procedures, school programs, and assessment);

EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Language Study

C

2.10 show how past and present literacy leaders contributed to the knowledge base;

EDLIT 735-Instructional Approaches: Observational Analysis

B

2.11 show an understanding of relevant reading research from general education and how it has influenced literacy education;


B

2.12 teach classic and contemporary children’s and young adults’ literature, and easy-reading fiction and nonfiction for adults, at appropriate levels;

EDLIT 732-Children’s Literature: Reaction paperEDLIT 742: Practicum:Observation evaluation and video reflection

C

2.13 illustrate the importance of giving learners opportunities in all aspects of literacy (e.g., as readers, writers, thinkers, reactors, or responders); and

EDLIT 732-Children’s Literature: Storytelling project and choral reading

C

2.14 show that goals, instruction, and assessment should be aligned.

EDLIT 731 – Literacy Assessment: Clinical Activities Report # 2.1

C

3.0 Individual DifferencesThe reading professional will: 3.1 illustrate how differences among

learners influence their literacy development;

ECC 704-Early Literacy: On-line Journal Responses and National Reading Panel critique (as well as many other courses and assignments throughout the program)

C

3.2 demonstrate an understanding and respect for cultural, linguistic, and ethnic diversity in the teaching process;

EDLIT 730-Language, Literacy & Learning: Instructional Application (Thematic Unit)(as well as many other courses and assignments throughout the program)

C



3.3 show that spelling is developmental and is based on student knowledge of the phonological system and of the letter names, their judgments of phonetic similarities and differences, and their ability to abstract phonetic information from letter names;

EDLIT 733-Writing: Clinical Activities Log Tab 3

C

3.4 illustrate the importance of creating programs to address the strengths and needs of individual learners; and

EDLIT 739.01-Special Needs moduleLiteracy lesson plan: child study intervention plan

C

3.5 show knowledge of federal, state, and local programs designed to help students with reading and writing problems.

EDLIT 739.01-Special Needs module: Article Summaries

C

4.0 Reading DifficultiesThe reading professional will: 4.1 demonstrate an understanding of the

nature and multiple causes of reading and writing difficulties;

EDLIT 736-Diagnosis: Causation Paper C

4.2 demonstrate knowledge of principles for diagnosing reading difficulties;

EDLIT 736-Diagnosis: Case Study C

4.3 illustrate an understanding of individualized and group instructional interventions targeted toward those students in greatest need or at low proficiency levels; and

EDLIT 737-Remediation: Practicum Skills File

C

4.4 show an understanding of the instructional implications of research in special education, psychology, and other fields that deal with the treatment of students with reading and learning difficulties.

EDLIT 736-Diagnosis: Case study and case study report

C

INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT5.0 Creating a Literate EnvironmentThe reading professional will be able to: 5.1 create a literate environment that

fosters interest and growth in all aspects of literacy;

EDLIT 732-Children’s Literature: Field experience observation and paper

C

5.2 use texts and trade books to stimulate interest, promote reading growth, foster appreciation for the written word, and increase the motivation of learners to read widely and independently for information, pleasure, and personal growth;

EDLIT 732-Children’s Literature: Evaluation of information books

C

5.3 model and discuss reading and writing as valuable, lifelong activities;

EDLIT 732-Children’s Lit: field experienceEDLIT 742-PracticumObservation evaluation and video reflection

C





5.4 provide opportunities for learners to select from a variety of written materials, to read extended texts, and to read for many authentic purposes;

EDLIT 732-Children’s Literature: Author study

C

5.5 provide opportunities for creative and personal responses to literature, including storytelling;

EDLIT 732-Children’s Literature: Author study, storytelling and response journals

C

5.6 promote the integration of language arts in all content areas;

EDLIT 734-Literacies across Disciplines: Unit plan and lesson plan

C

5.7 use instructional and information technologies to support literacy learning; and

EDLIT 734-Literacies across Disciplines: Analysis of supportive instructional materials

C

5.8 implement effective strategies to include parents as partners in the literacy development of their children.

ECC 704-Early Literacy: Literacy Box and/or materials evaluation

C

6.0 Word Identification, Vocabulary, and Spelling

The reading professional will be able to:

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

6.1 teach students to monitor their own word identification through the use of syntax, semantic, and graphophonemic relations;

EDLIT 737-Remediation: Term Plan and Weekly remedial plans and logs

C

6.2 use phonics to teach students to use their knowledge of letter/sound correspondence to identify sounds in the construction of meaning;

EDLIT 737-Remediation: Term plan and Weekly remedial plans and logs

C

6.3 teach students to use context to identify and define unfamiliar words;

EDLIT 737-Remediation: Term plan and Weekly remedial plans and logs

C

6.4 guide students to refine their spelling knowledge through reading and writing;


C

6.5 teach students to recognize and use various spelling patterns in the English language as an aid to word identification; and


C

6.6 employ effective techniques and strategies for the ongoing development of independent vocabulary acquisition.


C

7.0 ComprehensionThe reading professional will be able to: 7.1 provide direct instruction and model

when and how to use multiple comprehension strategies, including retelling;

EDLIT 742-PracticumObservation, journal and video reflection

C

7.2 model questioning strategies; EDLIT 742-PracticumObservation, journal and video reflection

C

7.3 teach students to connect prior knowledge with new information;


C

7.4 teach students strategies for monitoring their own comprehension;


C




7.5 ensure that students can use various aspects of text to gain comprehension, including conventions of written English, text structure and genres, figurative language, and intertextual links; and

EDLIT 734-Literacies across Disciplines: Analysis of expository text and development of expository text lesson plan

C

7.6 ensure that students gain understanding of the meaning and importance of the conventions of standard written English (e.g., punctuation or usage).

EDLIT 733-Writing: Clinical Activities Log tabs 1 through 4

C

8.0 Study StrategiesThe reading professional will be able to: 8.1 provide opportunities to locate and use

a variety of print, nonprint, and electronic reference sources;

EDLIT 734-Literacies across Disciplines: Unit plan

C

8.2 teach students to vary reading rate according to the purpose(s) and difficulty of the material;


C

8.3 teach students effective time management strategies;

EDLIT 734-Literacies across Disciplines: Reflection and analysis of practice, and development of expository text lesson plan

C

8.4 teach students strategies to organize and remember information; and

EDLIT 734-Literacies across Disciplines: Reflection and analysis of practice, and development of expository text lesson plan

C

8.5 teach test-taking strategies. EDLIT 731: Assessment:Clinical Activities C9.0 WritingThe reading professional will be able to: 9.1 teach students planning strategies most

appropriate for particular kinds of writing;


C

9.2 teach students to draft, revise, and edit their writing; and


C

9.3 teach students the conventions of standard written English needed to edit their compositions.


C

10.0 AssessmentThe reading professional will be able to: 10.1 develop and conduct assessments that

involve multiple indicators of learner progress; and

EDLIT 731 – Literacy Assessment: Clinical Activities and Art Portfolio

C

10.2 administer and use information from norm-referenced tests, criterion-referenced tests, formal and informal inventories, constructed response measures, portfolio-based assessments, student self-evaluations, work/performance samples, observations, anecdotal records, journals, and other indicators of student progress to inform instruction and learning.

EDLIT 731 – Literacy Assessment: Clinical Activities

C




ORGANIZING AND ENHANCING A READING PROGRAM11.0 Communicating Information about

ReadingThe reading professional will be able to: 11.1 communicate with students about their

strengths, areas for improvement, and ways to achieve improvement;

EDLIT 736-Diagnosis: Case Study Report C

11.2 communicate with allied professionals and paraprofessionals in assessing student achievement and planning instruction;

EDLIT 731 – Literacy Assessment: Clinical Activities

C

11.3 involve parents in cooperative efforts and programs to support students’ reading and writing development;

ECC 704: Early Literacy:Literacy Box and/or Materials Evaluation

C

11.4 communicate information about literacy and data to administrators, staff members, school board members, policymakers, the media, parents, and the community; and

EDLIT 735-Instructional Approaches: Newsletter

C

11.5 interpret research findings related to the improvement of instruction and communicate these to colleagues and the wider community.

EDLIT 735-Instructional Approaches: Newsletter

C

12.0 Curriculum DevelopmentThe reading professional will be able to: 12.1 initiate and participate in ongoing

curriculum development and evaluation;

EDLIT 739.01;.02;.03-Special Needs modulesAnalyze content area textbook

C

12.2 adapt instruction to meet the needs of different learners to accomplish different purposes;

EDLIT 739.01;.02;.03-Special Needs modulesDevelop multi-level lesson plan

C

12.3 supervise, coordinate, and support all services associated with literacy programs (e.g., needs assessment, program development, budgeting and evaluation, and grant and proposal writing);

EDLIT 738- Literacy ProgramsSchool and program evaluation

C

12.4 select and evaluate instructional materials for literacy, including those that are technology-based;


C

12.5 use multiple indicators to determine effectiveness of the literacy curriculum;


C

12.6 plan and implement programs designed to help students improve their reading and writing including those supported by federal, state, and local funding; and

EDLIT 738-Liteacy ProgramsSchool and program evaluation report

B

12.7 help develop individual educational plans for students with severe learning problems related to literacy.

EDLIT 737-Remediation: Term PlanEDLIT 739.03 Reflective journal, adaptation and analysis of curriculum

C

13.0 Professional DevelopmentThe reading professional will be able to:




13.1 participate in professional development programs;

EDLIT 740-Leadership: Culminating project Part 2

C

13.2 initiate, implement, and evaluate professional development programs;

EDLIT 740-Leadership: Culminating project Part 2

B

13.3 provide professional development experiences that help emphasize the dynamic interaction among prior knowledge, experience, and the school context as well as among other aspects of reading development;

EDLIT 740-Leadership Culminating project Part 2

B

13.4 provide professional development experiences that are sensitive to school constraints (e.g., class size or limited resources);

EDLIT 740-Leadership: Culminating Project Part 2

B

13.5 use multiple indicators to judge professional growth; and


C

13.6 model ethical professional behavior. EDLIT 738: Literacy Programs: Supervisor Log

C

14.0 ResearchThe reading professional will be able to: 14.1 apply research for improved literacy; EDLIT 738- Literacy Programs: School and

program evaluation reportB

14.2 conduct research with a range of methodologies (e.g., ethnographic, descriptive, experimental, or historical); and


B

14.3 promote and facilitate teacher- and classroom-based research.

EDLIT 740-Leadership: Culminating Project part 3

C

15.0 Supervision of ParaprofessionalsThe reading professional will be able to: 15.1 plan lessons for paraprofessionals; EDLIT 738-Literacy Programs: Para Plan

and supervisor logC

15.2 observe and evaluate paraprofessionals interacting with children and provide feedback to them on their performance;

EDLIT 738- Literacy Programs: Para Plan and supervisor log

C

15.3 provide professional development and training for paraprofessionals; and

EDLIT 738- Literacy Programs: Para Plan B

15.4 provide emotional and academic support for paraprofessionals.

EDLIT 738-Literacy Programs: Supervisor log

C

16.0 ProfessionalismThe reading professional will be able to: 16.1 pursue knowledge of literacy by

reading professional journals and publications; and participating in conferences and other professional activities;

EDLIT 735: Instructional Approaches: Book Clubs

C

16.2 reflect on one’s practice to improve instruction and other services to students;

EDLIT 742 – Practicum: Reflective Weekly logs, self-reflective video

C

16.3 interact with and participate in decision-making with teachers, teacher educators, theoreticians, and

EDLIT 742-Practicum: Daily instructional journals

C




researchers; 16.4 support and participate in efforts to

improve the reading profession by being an advocate for licensing and certification;

EDLIT 740-Leadership-Reflective Essay(s) C

16.5 participate in local, state, national, and international professional organizations whose mission is the improvement of literacy;


C

16.6 promote collegiality with other literacy professionals through regular conversations, discussions, and consultations about learners, literacy theory, and assessment and instruction;

EDLIT 738-Literacy Programs: Supervisor Log

C

16.7 write for publication; and EDLIT 740-Leadership: Culminating Project Part 4

B

16.8 make presentations at local, state, regional, and national meetings and conferences.


B




ECC 704.FW Language and Literacy in Early Childhood Education:

Birth Through 2nd grade.

Spring, 2002 Monday evenings 4:20 - 6:50Wednesday Evenings 7:00-9:30

Instructor: Deb Eldridge Telephone: (212) 772- 4775Cellular: (917) 304-7238

Office: 1110 West e-mail: [email protected] Hours:

Wednesdays 3:00 to 5:30 in my officeor by appointment

Course Description:A. Brief Description: Various perspectives of emergent literacy are examined to learn how young children

acquire language and become emergent readers and writers in their different cultural and linguistic communities. The role of families, centers, schools, and communities in urban environments, and assessment of early literacy development are studied. 15 hours of field experience included.

B. Expanded Description: This course deals with the theories and philosophies that have shaped early literacy acquisition and beginning reading instruction over the years. It involves the observation and assessment of children's early literacy behaviors to determine their needs and then planning appropriate literacy instruction or intervention for all children, including children from different cultural and language backgrounds and children whose primary language is not English. The methodology requires teachers to assume a critical stance about early literacy instruction and develop skills and knowledge to create an environment that fosters listening, speaking, reading and writing development of all children in inclusive settings. Family literacy partnerships are explored along with appropriate interventions for ensuring the success of children as emerging readers and writers by third grade.

Writing Requirements: Writing assignments are done as critical reaction papers to topics discussed and films viewed. Students also report on conversations in their classrooms, centers or daycare and Head Start sites and produce a written evaluation of a child's emerging writing development. A final examination of three essays that synthesize key ideas gained from study in the course is done.

Course Objectives

Knowledge: Teacher candidates will be able to: Know and explain various theories of language acquisition, cognition and learning and their

interrelationships among various learners of different language and cultural backgrounds. (IRA Standards 1.6 and 2.2)

Know and explain how differences among learners influence their literacy development. (IRA Standard 3.1)

Describe elements of a developmentally appropriate assessment model for assessing literacy acquisition of children from birth through 2nd grade.

Syllabi ECC 704.FW: Early Literacy21


Skills: Teacher candidates will be able to: Devise appropriate opportunities for diverse learners to meet their needs in and integrate their use of

listening, speaking, beginning reading, and writing development by the end of the second grade. (IRA Standard 2.6)

Plan appropriate literacy experiences for emergent, diverse learners in an urban environment. (IRA Standard 2.7)

Create environments and select resources that will serve literacy learners in a variety of settings. Critically evaluate materials, text and technology supports to ensure that they meet the needs of the

learners of diverse backgrounds and varying abilities. Select and use strategies that will promote inclusion of families and others in integrated literacy

curricula that serve the needs of English language learners and learners from a wide variety of social and economic backgrounds. (IRA Standard 5.8 and 11.3))

Dispositions: Teacher candidates will be able to: Demonstrate an appreciation for reading as a process that is influenced by multiple factors, including

individual development and the interplay of family, community and instructional/care-giving settings. (IRA Standard 1.1)

Recognize the ways in which literacy transmits moral and cultural values in the instructional environment. (IRA Standard 1.4)

Demonstrate willingness to constantly examine practice, theories and ideas and to adapt methods and materials, not to "bandwagon", but to modify them when the preponderance of evidence from well documented sources suggest it.

Collaborate and communicate with peers, administrators and others to improve practice and services to children and families in the area of language and literacy development.

Required readings:McGee, L. M., & Richgels, D. J. (2000). Literacy’s beginnings: Supporting young readers and writers (3rd Ed.).

Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.Class packet of readings.

Recommended Readings:Barclay, K., Benelli, C, & Curtis, A. (1995). Literacy begins at birth: What caregivers can learn from parents of

children who read early. Young children, 50 (4), 24-28.Clay, M. (1975). What did I write? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Ferreiro, E. (1992). The interplay between information and assimilation in beginning literacy. In W. H. Teale & E.

Sulzby (Eds.) Emergent literacy: Writing and reading (pp. 15-49). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.Hart, B. & Risley, T. R. (1995). Meaningful differences in the everyday experiences of young children. Baltimore,

MD: Brookes Publishing. (Selected chapters)Morrow, L. M. (1997). Literacy development in the early years. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Ortiz, L. I., & Engelbrecht, G. (1986). Partners in biliteracy: The school and community. Language Arts, 63 (5),

458-465.Paley, V. (1981). Wally's stories: Conversations in the kindergarten. Boston, MA: Harvard University Press.Piaget, J. (1955). The language and thought of the child. New York, NY: Meridian.Pinker, S. (1994). The language instinct: How the mind creates language. New York, NY: Harper Collins.

(Selected chapters)Salinger, T. (1993). Models of literacy instruction. New York, NY: Merrill.Simonson, R. & Walker, S. (1988). Multicultural literacy: Opening the American mind. Minneapolis, MN:

Graywolf Press.Stainthorp, R. & Hughes, D. (1999). Learning from children who read at an early age. New York, NY: RoutledgeTaylor, D. & Dorsey-Gaines C. (1988). Growing up literate: Learning from inner city families. Portsmouth, NH:

Heinemann. (Selected chapters)Vygotsky, L. S. (1962). Thought and language. Boston, MA: MIT Press. (Selected chapters)Watts-Taffe, S., & Truscott, D. M. (2000). Using what we know about language and literacy development for ESL

students in the mainstream classroom. Language Arts, 77 (3), 258-264.Wood, M. (1999). Essentials of elementary language arts. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.



Course Schedule

Dates Topics Readings Assignments DueWeek 1M: 2/4W: 1/30

Introduction to the course: How can we think about environments for literacy learning?

Read Chap. 1 for review and Chap. 6

Week 2M: 2/11W: 2/6

Literacy Beginners: What do they do?

Chapter 2 On-line journal

Week 3M: 2/18 Wed. is Mon.W: 2/13 No WED. class on 2/18

Pre-schools that make a difference


Week 4M: 2/25W: 2/27

Novices: How are they different?


Week 5M: 3/4W: 3/6

Kindergartens that value literacy


Week 6M: 3/11W: 3/13

Experimenters: More and better?


Week 7 M: 3/18W: 3/20

1st grades that support literacy learning


March 25-27 No class: Spring BreakWeek 8 M: 4/1W: 4/3

No Class: American Educational Research Association (AERA) Conference

Site Visits

Week 9 M: 4/8W: 4/10

Building a literacy community for young learners

Class Packet On-line journalExaminations (at your discretion)

Week 10M: 4/15W: 4/17

Word Study: Setting the stage

Class Packet On-line journal

Week 11M: 4/22W: 4/24

Comprehension: Bringing it alive

Class Packet On-line journal

Week 12M: 4/29W: 5/1

No Class: International Reading Association (IRA) Conference

Site Visits

Week 13M: 5/6W: 5/8

Written language: Tying it together

Class Packet On-line journalPartner Project

Week 14M: 5/13W: 5/15

Balanced Literacy: How, when and where

Class Packet On-line journalText Analysis

Week 15M: 5/20W: 5/22

Presentations None “Poster” sessions



Methods of evaluation:

Attendance and participation: One of the core beliefs of the literacy program is to encourage and support life-long learners and reflective practitioners through its course of study. Classes will supplement the textbook and build upon the knowledge gained through the readings. Thus, it is important that you attend class prepared to discuss the readings and participate actively in discussions and course activities. You will earn 10 points for each class for a total of 14 class sessions. (Total 140)

On-line Dialogue Journals: In conjunction with the core beliefs mentioned above, you will be expected to maintain an on-line journal of your thoughts, questions, comments and concerns pertaining to your reading and experiences during this class. Entries must be entered for each chapter or article(s) on or before the day the topic is addressed in class. This will enable you to reflect on the reading before our class discussions. These entries will be responded to by your classmate(s) following our class meeting. Thus, you will also serve as a responder to entries from your peers’ journals. I will use a lottery system to determine when your journal will be evaluated. In each class you will select the name of a colleague for response. I will evaluate each person’s journal/response collection a total of 3 times during the semester. I recommend you stay current as my evaluation of your work can occur at any time. (Total 60)

Choice of one of the following two partner projects. This is the project that will be presented to your peers in “poster” format on the last day of class: 1) Literacy Box: for this assignment, you will be required to create a literacy box. This project is mandatory for

those of you who are not currently teaching below grade 3. In this box, you will collect at least 5 books related in topic or theme. Once this decision is made, you will find ways to encourage children to engage with reading and writing activities related to these books. Provide a list of books and at least 5 activities that you or a parent might engage in with a child. Plan to be evaluated on the inclusion of families; the integration of listening, speaking, emergent reading and writing; and the degree to which children’s emergent literacy is supported by the experiences you design. See the literacy box rubric for details of the evaluation of the project. (Total 200 points).

2) Material Evaluation: for this assignment, you will be required to select and critically evaluate the literacy value of : a toy or game, electronic device, video or TV program, and a curriculum “package” or program.This project is mandatory for those of you who are teaching below grade 3. Once this decision is made, you will use the instruments designed in class to evaluate the appropriateness of the items for an early childhood setting. Provide a list of the items evaluated and your critique. Plan to be evaluated on the degree to which you identify how the emergent literacy of young children would be influenced, the values/morals transmitted by the items, and the accommodation to children’s differences made by the items. See the materials evaluation rubric for details of the evaluation of the project. (Total 200 points)

Text Analysis of an Early Childhood Literacy Environment: This is your major assignment for the course. You will need to visit an early childhood setting. You will use the instrument shared and practiced in class to document and evaluate the literacy environment of the setting. Plan to interview the teacher/caregiver as well as one or two children.Your goal is to develop as clear a picture as possible of the literacy environment and of the teacher’s “planfulness” and children’s awareness of that environment. Following your information gathering and analysis, you should write a reflection on what you learned about early literacy and supportive environments from the experience. See the rubric for details of the evaluation of the project (Total 300 points)

Examination: The examination for this course is an essay to be completed on-line and submitted to me as an e-mail or e-mail attachment. It is due any time after the eighth class. You are to access the National Reading Panel’s report on-line, and conduct an on-line search to find a critique of that report. Your examination task is to respond to the National Reading Panel report in light of what you have learned about emergent literacy and the experiences that



support its development. Provide a supporting reference list. See the examination rubric for details of how your work will be evaluated. (Total 100 points)

Poster Presentation: On the day of the last class, you will be making a “poster” presentation of your partner project. This work will not be graded. However, plan to represent your work on a poster and be prepared to answer questions about what you did and what you learned.

Course Policies:Plagiarism: I shouldn’t have to remind you that plagiarism will not be tolerated. Please remember that downloading materials from the internet and submitting them as your own work is considered plagiarism. You must submit a reference list of materials you use, quote, or adapt. It is college policy to fail plagiarists.Late submissions: I expect you will be prepared for each class and all assignments will be turned in on time. Because all of your work will be turned in on time, you will not need to worry that 20% of the points assigned to an assignment or project will be deducted for each day an assignment is late. For example, turning in an assignment on the day after class (rather than in class) counts as one day late.Professionalism: You are expected to proof, type and/or word process all assignments unless other directions are provided. Points will be deducted, especially on your examination and projects, if you choose not to proof or correct your work. Remember that you are working toward your Masters in Literacy. Your assignments should be considered “publishable” works. Thus, they should have cycled through the writing process cycles of planning, drafting, revising, and editing.

Rubrics for Evaluation

Attendance and participation rubric:1 (3 points) 2 (5 points) 3 (7 points) 4 (10 points)

Attended the class, did not contribute to class discussion, did not actively participate in group work/activities and was not prepared for class.

Attended the class, contributions to class discussions were limited, participation in group work/activities was reluctant, and displayed a lack of interest or minimal preparation for class.

Attended the class, contributed to class discussions, participated in group work, and displayed preparation for class.

Attended the class, contributed meaningfully to class discussions, actively participated in group work, and displayed thoughtfulness and a “attitude” of life-long learning.

On-line Journal rubric:1 (3 points) 2 (5 points) 3 (7 points) 4 (10 points)

Original entries are missing, provide limited evidence of reflection, and make few (if any) connections to reading and discussions. Responses to peer journals are missing or perfunctory.

Original entries summarize the readings or discussion (not what was learned), provide limited evidence of reflection, and make erratic connections to readings and discussions. Responses to peer journals are simplistic.

Original entries summarize what was learned, give ample evidence of thoughtful reflections, and make some connections to readings and discussions. Responses to peer journals are appropriate but may “terminate” the discussion.

Original entries describe in detail what was learned, give extensive evidence of thoughtful reflections, and make explicit connections to readings and discussions. Responses to peer journals are thoughtful and “move” the conversation in a related direction.



Literacy Box Rubric:

1 (125 points) 2 (150 points) 3 (175 points) 4 (200 points)Materials and activities do not support the learning of young children and are not supported by references. There are fewer than five book and five activities shared. The books do not all share a theme or topic. Activities are repetitive and do not include parents as partners.

Three or fewer of the materials and activities are appropriate for the learning of young children and are minimally supported by references. Some of the books and activities share a theme or topic but integrate fewer than three curriculum areas. This is little variety in activities. They include fewer than three areas of literacy development and parents as partners are marginally incorporated..

At least four of the materials and activities are appropriate for the learning of young children and are supported by references. All books are related in theme or topic and integrate at least three other curriculum areas. This is some variety in activities. They include at least three areas of literacy development and include parents as partners in at least three of the five books.

Materials and activities are appropriate for the learning of young children and are supported by references. All books are related by theme or topic and activities integrate more than three curriculum areas.. There is rich variety in activities. They include all areas of literacy development and include parents as partners throughout the activities.

Materials Evaluation Rubric:

1 (125 points) 2 (150 points) 3 (175 points) 4 (200 points)A description of materials is inadequate or includes fewer than four materials. The strengths (pros) and weaknesses (cons) are not defined in terms of literacy learning and references are inconsistently, if at all, provided.

The description of four materials is sometimes superficial. The strengths (pros) and weaknesses (cons) are erratically defined in terms of literacy learning that is grounded in the literature.

The description of four materials is adequate. The strengths (pros) and weaknesses (cons) are adequately defined in terms of literacy learning that is (for the most part) grounded in the literature.

A full description of each of four materials is included. The strengths (pros) and weaknesses (cons) are thoroughly defined in terms of early literacy learning and references are provided.



Text Analysis of an Early Literacy Setting Rubric:

1 (150 points) 2 (200 points) 3 (250 points) 4 (300 points)Text inventory provides an inadequate or superficial summary of fewer than 17 text areas. 2 student and teacher interviews are not included and key insights are not highlighted. Text analysis demonstrates a superficial understanding of emergent literacy and the experiences that support it. The relationship of language acquisition to literacy development is not explored. References to major theories of literacy learning are absent or inadequate and a reference list is not provided. Critique is not grounded in an explicit, personal vision of literacy learning in early childhood.

Text inventory provides a minimal summary of each of 17 text areas. 2 student and teacher interviews are included but fewer than three key insights are highlighted. Text analysis demonstrates a basic understanding of emergent literacy and some of the experiences that support it. The relationship of language acquisition to literacy development is explored at a basic or perfunctory level in terms of the text inventoried. References to major theories of literacy learning are sketchy and the reference list provided is incomplete. Critique is grounded in a superficial vision of literacy learning in early childhood.

Text inventory provides an adequate summary of each of 17 text areas. 2 student and teacher interviews are included and at least three key insights are highlighted. Text analysis demonstrates an adequate understanding of emergent literacy and the experiences that support it. The relationship of language acquisition to literacy development is explored adequately in terms of the text inventoried. References to major theories of literacy learning are explicit and a reference list is provided. Critique is grounded in a personal vision of literacy learning in early childhood.

Text inventory provides a thorough summary of each of 17 text areas. 2 student and teacher interviews are included and three key insights are highlighted. Text analysis demonstrates an understanding of emergent literacy and the experiences that support it. The relationship of language acquisition to literacy development is explored in terms of the text inventoried. References to major theories of literacy learning are thoroughly presented and the reference list is extensive. Critique is grounded in an explicit, personal vision of all areas of literacy learning in early childhood.

Examination Rubric:

1 (25 points) 2 (50 points) 3 (75 points) 4 (100 points)Fewer that three major findings of the National Reading Panel are presented in summary and are not linked explicitly to early literacy learning. Critique of the findings highlights only one critical review. Incorporation of personal insights and understandings in each area of the summarized findings are not consistently included.

At least three major findings of the National Reading Panel are presented in summary and are only superficially linked to early literacy learning. Critique of the findings highlights only one critical review. Incorporation of personal insights and understandings in each area of the summarized findings are inconsistently included, impractical or superficial.

At least four major findings of the National Reading Panel are presented in summary and are linked adequately to early literacy learning. Critique of the findings may superficially highlight more than one critical review. Incorporation of personal insights and understandings in each area of the summarized findings are included but may not be reflective or practical in application..

At least five major findings of the National Reading Panel are presented in summary and are thoroughly linked to early literacy learning. Critique of the findings highlights more than one critical review. Incorporation of personal insights and understandings in each area of the summarized findings are included and demonstrate reflection and practical application..



HUNTER COLLEGE OF CUNY,DEPARTMENT OF CURRICULUM AND TEACHING

SPRING 2002EDLIT 730 Language, Literacy, and Learning in School Contexts: Grades 1 through 6Instructor: Carmen I. Mercado Office: 928 West(212) 772-4693 E-mail: [email protected]

Office hours: Wed. 3-5, Thurs. 2-4 or by appointment

Course Description:

A. Brief Description: Psychological, anthropological, socio-linguistic and sociological theories on the interrelationship between language, literacy and learning. Development and documentation of the effects of strategies for building community and promoting the acquisition and development of literacy in ways that are responsive to the range of diversity found in urban schools. Includes 15 hours in a classroom analyzing language use.

B. Expanded Description: Interdisciplinary research and theories on literacy as language and cultural learning will be featured. A reflective practice approach will be assumed in the presentation of topics such as language influences on literacy acquisition and cognitive development, literacy assessment as a language-based process, and influences on reader-text transactions. Teacher candidates will select, adapt and monitor the effects of identified research-based practices on English language learners, socio-economically disadvantaged students, students with disabilities, and gifted students for purposes of meeting rigorous New York State learning standards. Includes 15 hours of practicum.

Course Objectives:

Teacher candidates will engage in reflective practice from a socio-cultural perspective to explore ways to improve the acquisition and development of literacy for diverse purposes in diverse learning settings. The following learning outcomes will be sought:

Knowledge: Teacher candidates will be able to: Demonstrate understanding that literacy is about written and spoken language; the phonemic,

morphemic, semantic, syntactic, and pragmatic systems of language interact during the reading and writing process. (IRA Standards 2.1, 2.3, 2.4, and 2.5)

Demonstrate understanding that learners new to English draw on their background knowledge, including knowledge of their primary language when they engage in the reading process in English. Readers who are unfamiliar with the language of a given text-- with the network of word meanings, with the way words modify and relate to each other-- may have difficulty deciphering its meaning. (IRA Standard 1.5)

Explain that contextual factors in the school, especially language, shape readers’ willingness to transact with a range of texts. Readers' experiences with and attitude toward the texts they are exposed to in school may influence the purposes they set for themselves, their efforts to comprehend, and ultimately, the personal, social, communicative, and academic learning they derive from these experiences. (IRA Standards 1.7 and 2.9)

.Describe the role of literacy in privileging and denying access to societal goods and services. (IRA Standard 1.3)

Syllabi EDLIT 730: Language, Literacy and Learning

28

mailto:[email protected]


Skills: Teacher candidates will be able to: Engage in reflective practice from a socio-culturaI perspective to explore ways to improve

the acquisition and development of literacy for diverse purposes in diverse learning settings. Adapt research-based practices for building community and gaining access to multiliteracy and

employ systematic procedures to document the impact of these practices on special education, English as a Second Language, gifted, and underachieving learners.

Dispositions:

Understand, respect, and value cultural, linguistic, and ethnic diversity. (IRA Standards 1.2 and 3.2)

Demonstrate a willingness to examine how their perceptions of and attitudes toward students’ use of language limits or broadens students’ access to intellectual, social, and communicative resources that enhance the meaning construction process.

Understand that teachers play a key role in guiding learners to understand how written language works, broadening the range of textual language accessible to learners through direct instruction and through social learning processes.

Some questions we will address in this course:

1. How do children acquire knowledge of spoken and written language? 2. What can we learn about children's knowledge of written language from observing them read

and write? 3. What can we learn about children's knowledge of spoken language from their interactions with

adults and peers in and out of the classroom? 4. How are reading materials an influence on children's language comprehension? 5. How do texts contribute to children's knowledge of language (e.g., vocabulary knowledge,

literary language) and to their literacy development? 6. How is classroom talk an influence on language comprehension, literacy development, and

learning?7. What language and literacy resources do children bring from home that teachers may use to

extend their literacy development?8. How can the study of language study prepare learners to accomplish personal, social and

academic goals (meeting challenging English Language Arts standards and promotional requirements)?

9. How can teachers assist learners to monitor their comprehension of written language and to communicate their understanding of written language?

Some assumptions we will test in this course: 1. Young children enter school with a high degree of competence in the language of their homes

and communities. 2 Children acquire knowledge of language from experiences with print. 3. The errors children make when speaking and writing provide insights on their knowledge of

language. 4. Children's performance (e.g., miscues) as they read aloud connected text reveals their

knowledge of language. 5. Children progress through developmental stages in acquiring word analysis and word

recognition ability .


29


6. The integration of all the language systems (grammatical, graphophonic, semantic, and pragmatic) are necessary for reading to take place.

7. Short language sequences are harder to comprehend than are longer ones.

Required Readings:

Dyson, A. H. (1993). From prop to mediator: The changing role of written language in children's symbolic repertoire. In B. Spodek & O.N.Saracho (Eds.), Language and literacv in earlv childhood education. NY: Teachers College Press.

Ehri, L. C. (1993). Becoming an alphabetic reader is not easy for emergent readers. International Journal of Educational Research, 19(7): 607-616.

Goodman, Y.M. & Goodman, K. (1994). To err is human: Learning about language processes by analyzing miscues (pp. 104-123). In R. B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Goodman, Y.M. (1996). Revaluing readers while they revalue themselves: Retrospective miscue analysis. The Reading Teacher, 49(8): 600-609.

Goodman, Y.M. (1995, November). Miscue analysis for classroom teachers: Some history and some procedures. Primary Voices K-6. 3(4): 2-9.

Heath, S.B. (1985). Literacy or literate skills? Considerations for ESL/EFL learners. In P. Larson, E.L. Judd, & L. S. Messerschmidt (Eds.), On TESOL 84: Brave new world for TESOL (pp.15-28). Washington, DC: Teachers of English to Speakers of Other Languages.

Hiebert, E.H. & Fischer, C.W. (1991). Task and talk structures that foster literacy. In E.H. Hiebert (Ed.). Literacy for a diverse society ( pp. 141- 156). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

Idol, L. (1988, January/February). Johnny can't read: Does the fault lie with the book, the teacher, or Johnny? Remedial and Special Education, 1(9): 8-35.

Jimenez, R.T., Garcia, G.E., & Pearson, P.D. (1995, Spring). Three children, two languages, and strategic reading: Case studies in bilingual/monolingual reading. American Educational Research Journal, 32(1): 67-97.

Liberman, I.Y. & Liberman, A.M. (1990). Whole language vs. code emphasis: Underlying assumptions and their implications for reading instruction. Annals of Dyslexia, 40: 51-76.

Mercado, C.I. (in press). Literacy development among Latino youth in New York City: An unexploited potential. N. Hornberger: (Ed.). Revisiting the continua of biliteracy : A framework for educational research.

Moats, L. C. (2001, Summer). Overcoming the language gap. And invest generously in teacher professional development. American Educator.

Ruddell, R.B. & Ruddell, M.R. (1994). Language acquisition and literacy processes (83- 103). In R.B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.


30


Stahl, S.A., Duffy-Hester, A.M., & Stahl, K.A.D. (1998 ). Theory and research into practice: Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were afraid to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33(3),338-355.

Sulzby, E. (1997). Children's emergent reading of favorite stories ( pp. 244-280 ). In R.B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Taylor, D. & Dorsey-Gaines, C. (1998 .Growing up literate. Learning from inner-city families. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. (Chapter 4).

Valdes, G. (2001). Immigrant children and the teaching of English (pp. 10-28). Learning and not learning English: Latino students in American schools. NY: Teachers College Press.

Vernon, S.A. & Ferreiro, E. (1999). Writing development: A neglected variable in the consideration of phonological awareness. Harvard Educational Review,69(4): 394-415.

Study Group Choices (Select one): Cazden, C. B. ( 2001). C1assroom discourse: The language of teaching and 1earning (2nd.ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. McGuinness, D. (1997). Why our chi1dren can’t read and what we can do about it. New York, NY: Touchtone. (Study Group Choice) Snow, C., Burns, M., & Griffin, P. (Eds.), (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young chi1dren. Washington, DC: National Academy Press. Wolfram, W., Temple, C.T., & Christian, D. (1999). Dialects in schools and communities. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence, Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

You are expected to be familiar with and to consult: English Language Arts Resource Guide with Core Curriculum published by the NYS Education Dep't (http:/ /www.n~spd.gov). On the web (not in the document) you will also find a summary of the ELA standards that presents indicators (evidence) of learning.

Reading grade by grade and writing. Primary literacy standards for kindergarten through third grade. NYC Board of Education.

Recommended Readings:

Crystal, D. (987). The Cambridge encyclopedia of language. NY: Cambridge University Press.

Echevarria, J. & Graves, A. ( 1998). Sheltered content instruction. Teaching English language learners with diverse abilities. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon

Edelsky, C. (1986). Writing in a bilingual 12rogram. Norwood, NJ: Ablex.

Ericson, L. & Juliebo, M.F. (1998). The phonological awareness handbook for kindergarten and primary teachers. Newark, DE: IRA.

Goodman, K. (1993). Phonics phacts. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.


31


Heath, S.B. & Maniola, L. (1991). Children of promise: Literate activity in linguistically and cultural IX diverse classrooms. Washington, DC: NEA.

McCrum, R., Cran, W., & MacNeil, R. (1986). The story of English. NY: Viking Penguin Inc

Nagy, W. E. ( 1988 ). Teaching vocabulary to improve reading comprehension. NCTE/IRA

Palincsar, A. S. & David, Y. M. (1991). Promoting literacy through classroom dialogue (122-140). In E. H. Hiebert ( Ed. ). Literacy for a diverse society. .NY: Teachers College Press.

Rosebery, A., Warren, B., & Conant, F.R. (1992). Appropriating scientific discourse: Findings from language minority classrooms. Cambridge, MA: TERC.

Ruiz, N. ( 1995 ). The social construction of ability and disability: II. Optimal and at-risk lessons in a bilingual special education classroom. Journal of Learning Disabilities. 28( 8):491-502.

Smitherman, G. (1994). “The blacker the berry, the sweeter the juice": African American student writers. In A.H. Dyson & C.Geneshi ( Eds.). The need for story. Urbana, IL: NCTE.

Trask, R.L. & Mayblin, B. (2000). Introducing linguistics. Cambridge, UK: Totem Books.

Yopp, H.K. & Singer, H. (1997). Toward an interactive reading instructional model: Explanation of activation of linguistic awareness and metalinguistic ability in learning to read. In R.B. Ruddell, M.R. Ruddell, & H. Singer (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Wells, G. (1995). Language and the inquiry oriented curriculum. Curriculum Inguiry, 25(3): 233-269,

Date Topics Related Readings Assignment DueFebruary 4 Session 1

Rationale and Overview of Course

Teacher Profile

February 11 Session 2 Understanding the Structure of English

Moats Class Summary

February 20 (Wed) Session 3

Primary and New Language Acquisition and Development

Ruddell & Ruddell and Valdes

Personal Goal Statement

February 25 Session 4 Sound Perception and the Print-Sound Code

Goodman & Goodman or Liberman & Liberman

Language Study: ELL's Background; Experiences, Attitudes, Interests. Submit Journal Entries

March 4 Session 5 Understanding Words and their Meaning

Ehri or Stahl, Duffy-Hester, & Stahl

Language Study: ELL's Phonological Knowledge & Suggested Interventions

March 11 Session 6 Understanding Sentences

Idol or Sulzby Language Study: ELL's lexical Knowledge & Suggested Interventions

March 18 Session 7 Understanding Connected Text

Jimenez, Garcia, & Pearson or Goodman (1995) & Goodman (1996)

Language Study: ELL's Syntactic Knowledge Suggested Interventions Submit Journal Entries


32


April 1 Session 8 Independent Assignment

Family Interview Community Walk

Interview Protocol, Observation Guide

No class meeting

April 8 Session 9 Language and Literacy in Homes & Communities

Taylor & Dorsey-Gaines Chapter 4

Summary of Home Interview and Community Survey

April 15 Session 10 Understanding Students' Written Language

Mercado or Dyson Analysis of Written Language

April 22 Session 11 Mid-Semester Evaluation

Study Group Panel Presentations

Fact Sheet on Book, Language Study: Assessment of Written Language & Suggested Interventions

April 29 Session 12 Understanding Language as Learning Environment

Hiebert & Fischer Submit Journal Entries

May 6 Session 13 Language Study Heath & Mangiola or Heath (1985)

Language Study: Summary and Conclusions (with Revisions )

May 13 Session 14 Language Games Unit on Language with Language Games

May 20 Session 15 Evaluation of Course Activities

Submit all Journal Entries; Revised Goal Statement

Overview of Course Requirements for EDLIT 730, Spring 2002

Goal Statement This assignment provides a tool for monitoring and assessing what you are learning in EDLIT 731 What do you wish/need to accomplish in this course that will prepare you to meet your responsibilities as a literacy educator? You will review this statement mid-semester and at the el of this semester to assess your accomplishments and raise new questions and concerns sparked through course activities.

Required Readings Readings will provide a theoretical understandings of language and literacy from linguistic, psycholinguistic and sociolinguistic perspectives. Come to class prepared to comment on the challenges presented by the articles (e.g., linguistic complexity), the key arguments (theses) and evidence each presents in relation to your experiences as a teacher and/or learner. Comment on their utility in informing practice. I suggest you keep notes of your readings to facilitate discussion and mark sections you wish to discuss in class with post it notes. This will help you to prepare your journal entries.

Weekly Journal Entries (20% of grade)This assignment is intended to help you deepen your understanding of the "big ideas" that are presented in class discussions and readings and that have implications for classroom practice. For each session, you will integrate the "big ideas" discussed and indicate how these ideas contribute to your expertise as a literacy educator. Comment on the evidence you are finding from your interactions with learners and/ or from your personal life that support or refute the ideas from class discussions and readings. (1- 2 pages )


33


Language Study Knowledge of written and spoken language in school contexts will be examined. Select from tasks presented in class, described in the readings, or used in your school to examine one learner's Phonological Knowledge, Oral Communication and Expression, Written Language Comprehension and Written Language Expression. We will also examine literacy experiences in home and community contexts. Tasks, procedures, and findings for each component will be described individually. Insights gained from collaborating on the analysis and interpretation of response to these tasks will be presented in a concluding statement (1-2 typed pages per section).

Book Study Group and Presentation (15% Of grade)This assignment will broaden your understanding of professional literature. You will collaborate with peers in the analysis of the book you have in common. Discussion groups will share information and practical applications in a formal presentation. Class time will be provided to meet with your discussion group and to consult with me, as needed. (Handouts and visuals)

Instructional Applications ( 15 % of grade)This assignment enables you to develop practical applications suggested by the knowledge base have developed. You will prepare an original six-week thematic unit on Language Study that includes a rationale for the unit, standards-based objectives it addresses, activities, materials, procedures (including questions), writing assignments and assessments. Learning outcomes should reflect insights gained through your language study and from class discussions and readings. You will be given class time to brainstorm and develop ideas with interested members of our class community .


34


EDLIT 731 Literacy AssessmentFall, 2002

Monday 7:00 – 9:30 p.m. Rm. W1133

Dr. Yang HuOffice: W 1107Phone: 772-4753Email: [email protected] (open 7x24)Course Website: http://bb.hunter.cuny.eduOffice Hours: Mondays: 4: 45 - 6: 45 P.M.

Wednesdays: 3:00-4:00 P.M. And by appointment

COURSE OVERVIEW

This course offers an in-depth treatment of a wide range of theoretical principles and the practical classroom assessment procedures that grow from them for purposes of gauging and supporting student learning and development in classroom and school-wide literacy programs. As noted in the catalogue description, a 15-hour field experience in literacy assessment is required.

Peter Johnston writes, “Assessment is a profoundly human, social phenomenon, thoroughly value-laden, and it cannot be otherwise. And in order to draw valid conclusions about a child’s learning, a teacher must understand how learning takes place. The very complexity of this is in knowing the available assessment options and understanding their consequences.” Johnston will take us on a journey, through his book which we will read for the semester, in learning and reflecting about transforming literacy assessment from the classroom out.

The course provides you with an opportunity to make connections on an ongoing basis between your hands-on experiences in literacy assessment, class discussions, and assigned readings in order to develop the knowledge, skills and dispositions needed to assess and meet the needs of diverse learners. Goals for this course are: to update and extend your knowledge and skills in using a broad range of literacy assessment strategies and approaches for a variety of purposes; to promote congruence among assessment, teacher decision making, and instruction; to encourage effective communication about reading progress to students, parents, and other school personnel involved in the support and evaluation of literacy programs, and to encourage participants’ commitment to leadership in literacy education in your schools, districts and communities.

COURSE OBJECTIVES

At the conclusion of this course, students in the Masters in Literacy Professional Certificate Program should be able to:

understand that goals, instruction, and assessment should be aligned (IRA Standard 2.14) develop and conduct assessments that involve multiple indicators of learner progress

(IRA Standard 10.1) administer and use information from norm-referenced tests, criterion-referenced test,

formal and informal inventories, constructed response measures, portfolio-based

Syllabi EDLIT 731: Assessment35

http://bb.hunter.cuny.edu/



assessments, student self-evaluations, work/performance samples, observations, anecdotal records, journals, and other indicators of student progress to inform instruction and learning (IRA Standard 10.2)

communicate with allied professionals and paraprofessionals in assessing student achievement and planning instruction (IRA Standard 11.2)

teach test taking strategies in the context of a reading program (IRA Standard 8.5)

REQUIRED TEXTS

Peter Johnston. 1997. Knowing Literacy: Constructive Literacy Assessment.

Portland, ME: Stenhouse Publishers.

Lucy Calkins, Kate Montgomery and Donna Santman. 1998. A Teacher’s Guide to Standardized

Reading Tests: Knowledge Is Power. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann

Additional Sources: To be made available by the instructor, clinical “Test Files” and simulations,

and articles from professional journals on current issues in assessment to be shared in

class, including the following:

Bracey, G.W. (2000). Thinking about Test and Testing: A Short Primer in “Assessment

Literacy.” Washington, DC: American Youth Policy Forum,

http://www.aypf.org/Bracey/Rep.pdf (This article is also listed on the class website,

under External Links. You can download it and make a hardcopy for yourself.)

CLASS WEBSITE (http://bb.hunter.cuny.edu)

The class website has been created using Blackboard 5, which offers a course management system. The class site provides you with many useful functions such as announcements, course information, assignments, syllabus, Discussion Board, useful links, just to name a few. During the second week of school, we will meet in the computer lab (Hunter N1001) to demonstrate and learn how to use the class website.

You are required to create a personal homepage on the class site. It is easy—just follow the directions and fill out some boxes. You will use the class website in the following ways:

1. Looking for and verifying course information: such as announcements, assignments, syllabus, etc.

2. Reading and downloading handouts, required and recommended articles and test materials.

3. Participating in the Discussion Board activities.4. Keeping yourself up-to-date by checking the class website especially when you have to

miss a class.5. Communicating with me and other course participants via email and group pages.



http://www.aypf.org/Bracey/Rep.pdf


6. Checking your grades.

To access the class site, you must have access to the internet and an email address. If not, you can use the Hunter College computer lab and the email account issued to you free of charge by Hunter College. If you have any trouble accessing the website, please contact the Blackboard management at 650-3062. Here’s the procedure you need to follow to login to the class site.

1. Go to Class Website: http://bb.hunter.cuny.edu 2. Enter username: Your user name is your Hunter College E-mail login (e.g.” jsmith). Every Hunter student

is issued an E-mail account. I will pass around my roster for you to verify your user

name.

3. Enter password:Your password is ‘hc’ plus the last six digits of your student ID: e.g.: hc123456 (Password is case-sensitive. Make sure you use lower case.)

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

A. Class Attendance and Meaningful Participation (15%)

A significant portion of the course is to be learned through in-class demonstrations, literacy case analyses, and collaborative work. Your active participation in and contribution to the activities of this class are essential and expected. (Participation means that you find your own ways to engage in the material and support other’s engagements.) Excused or unexcused absences may lower your final grade. If you have to miss two or more classes, please contact me so we can come up with ways to make up for the classes.

You are expected to prepare for each class and clinical activity through critical, reflective reading of texts and other assigned readings, including those materials associated with the clinical activities such as test materials and course handouts.

B. Discussion Board Participation on the Class Website (15%) Three times this semester, I will post questions on the discussion board of the class website. You will respond to the questions and to at least one fellow participant of the course. The questions will center around some of our reading assignments, demonstrations, personal or class experiences, or supplemental journal articles. These personal responses to the questions will be short, 1 to 2 pages, informal, reflective pieces that encourage you to read critically and creatively as you make connections to your developing knowledge base and with your literacy learning and/or teaching experiences.

C. Portfolio of Aesthetic Experiences (15%)

This project requires you to be present for classes during the first three weeks of November (11/4, 11/11, and 11/18) as most of the work relating to the construction of the portfolio will be




done in class. You will have to do extra work if you have to miss a class during the three-week unit.

Your portfolio will contain artifacts, record of your art-making processes, reactions and responses to the story telling performance--As if the Past Were Listening, reflection, self-evaluation, etc. The entire aesthetic experiences offer us a unique opportunity to personally experience the assessment of authentic learning, to document our learning processes, and to reflect upon the implication in literacy assessment. Detailed guidelines will be posted on the class website under Assignments.

A. Clinical Activities (55%)

As a program requirement, this course has a 15-hour field experience in literacy assessment. The 15 hours out-of-class time will be needed for working throughout the semester with varied tests and instruments of assessment, simulation materials and close study of two students. It is your responsibility to plan and make time for this experience. The clinical activities will satisfy the 15-hour field requirement, and they will include the following:

1. Literacy Assessment of Two Students, including:

1.1 Attitude, interest and perceptions survey/interview1.2 Basic reading inventory

Classroom reading miscue analysis Running record

Or if you work with emergent readers, you will do:Drawing, dictation, first reading, familiarity with literature,

book handling, reading a predictable book and retelling. 1.3 Children’s self-assessment of reading1.4 Reading performance samples1.5 Formal/informal test assessments

In completing this part, you will first thoroughly and carefully read the directions for using each instrument. You will then try out the instrument with your two students and collect the data. For each instrument, you will turn in a learning log reporting and analyzing the result, and critiquing the instrument.

2. Reporting: Interpretation, Summary and Instructional Plan

2.1 Select one of the two students and fill out a Report/Summary Sheetwhich is intended for his/her teachers in the next grade, including the reading specialist, about the literacy assessment of this child, including the following three parts:

Interpretation of data from the above five areas; Summary of the child’s strengths and weaknesses, effective and ineffective

strategies;



Instructional plan for this child: including specific learner objectives and teaching goals.

2.2 Write one paragraph describing how you would report to the child’s parents noting similarities to and differences from the above report from the allied professionals.

Protecting the identity of the children in your case study: Please make sure that the children’s names does not appear anywhere in the sample. If they do, please white them out.

Each log should bear the heading in the top-left position of the first page, as follows: Your Name Learning Log # EDLIT 731, Fall, 2002 Child’s Grade Level

Detailed guidelines will be posted on the class website under Assignments.

E. Evaluation and Policies

All assignments need to be completed and turned in on time or we lose the rhythm of our work together. Assignments turned in late are subject to grade reductions. Late papers may be read only after other work has been taken care of. If you fall behind in your work, you need to see me immediately.

Assignments must be typed using 12 point type and 1 inch margins. Assignments will be evaluated in terms of quality, completeness, and timeliness. Each

assignment should provide the instructor with sufficient evidence that the concepts in the course have been understood and applied. This will require a synthesis of information from lectures, readings, class discussions, and personal experiences.

If your work is handed in with conceptual errors, or with missing components, it must be rewritten. Your grade on re-written work will be the average of the first grade and the second grade.

If you want your work returned to you with my comments, you need to (1), turn in two copies, and (2) not put your paper inside the sheet protectors.

Please turn in your work in a light-weight container—such as a manila folder, paper or soft plastic folder with pockets. I live in New Jersey and would appreciate it if you do not use the heavy hard cover ring binders.

Incomplete: There will be no incompletes given for this course unless (a), you have completed the majority of course requirements and assignments and (b), you must postpone the completion of the final requirements for medical or personal reasons beyond your control (reasons and emergencies must be legitimate and documented). You need to formally request the incomplete grade by meeting with me and filling out an incomplete request form detailing plans to complete the course. Hunter policy dictates that all work must be completed within one year after the end of this semester or the IN grade will become permanent.



COURSE OUTLINE

Date IV. Topics V. Clinical Activities

VI. Assignments Due

Class 19/9

Introduction and course overview.

Literacy assessment: examine our own experiences, beliefs and assumptions.

Class 29/17Tuesday!

Introduction to Blackboard

Essential characteristics of standardized tests: reliability, validity and correlation

Purposes and principles of literacy assessment

Recognizing barriers to effective literacy assessment

(Class will be held in the Hunter College computer lab, HN1001.)

Reading Survey(Log 1.11)

Bracey, “Thinking about Test and testing” Skim parts I and II, read Part III. (This article is on the class website under External Links.)

Class 39/23

Understanding social and educational basis of literacy assessment

Knowledge required for accurate assessment

Standards for the assessment of reading and writing.

Reading Interview(Log 1.12)

Johnston, Chapters 1-3

Response to discussion board question (I) due.

Class 49/30

Assessing the classroom learning environment

Metacognitive aspects of literacy: students perceptions about literacy events, strategies and about themselves

How to use questionnaires, interviews and group discussions in assessing

Self Assessment(1.31-1.35)

Johnston, Chapters 4, 5 and 8



metacognitionClass 510/7

Oral reading: emergent and beginning readers

Running records Phonemic awareness

Running Records(Log 1.21)

Johnston, chapters 21 and 22Portfolio due.

Class 610/16Wed.!

Oral reading: transitional and intermediate readers

Miscue analysis Informal reading

inventories: Standard procedures and adaptations that incorporate interactive assessment and miscue analysis concepts

Miscue Analysis (Log 1.22)

TBA

Class 7 10/21

Possibilities and implications: retelling, questioning, cloze, and observation records and checklists


Class 810/28

Performance tasks and rubrics

Assessing writing products and processes: an overview

Spelling Inventory(Log 1.52)

TBALearning Logs 1.11, 1.12, 1.21 and 1.22 due.

Class 911/4Portfolio!

Meaningful and constructive literacy: What does it look like?

Child’s concepts of being literate

LCI workshop: Portfolio construction

Collect/analyze children’s work samples(Log 1.41-1.43)



LCI performance Reflection and Portfolio

construction

Collect/analyzechildren’s work samples(Log 1.41-1.43)

Johnston, Chapters 26 and 27


LCI workshop: Portfolio reflection

Assessing literacy in developmental stages

Collect/analyze children’s work samples(Log 1.41-1.43)

Johnston, Chapters 12-14, 16(You may skim chapters 12-13 if your case studies involve transitional and intermediate readers.)Response to discussion



board question (II) due.Class 1211/25

Engaging and communicating with allied professionals

Reporting(Log 2.1-2.2)


Class 1312/2

Understanding traditional forms of evaluation

Interpreting test results(Log 1.51)

Calkins, et al, Chapters 1-3Learning logs (1.11-1.52) due.

Class 1412/9

Teaching to the test? Test preparation in the reading workshop

Calkins, et al, Chapters 5-9Part 2 of clinical activities due.

Class 1512/16

Reflections and celebrations

EDLIT 731 Keeping Track of Your Grade

Name:

Date:

1. Class attendance/meaningful participation ______ out of 15

2. Discussion Board participation ______ out of 15Responses to Questions I Pts/25 X 5 = ______ out of 5

Responses to Questions II Pts/25 X 5 = ______ out of 5Responses to Questions III Pts/25 X 5 = ______ out of 5

3. Portfolio of aesthetic experience Pts/24 X 15 ______ out of 15

4. Clinical activities______ out of 55

Emergent Readers RubricGrade

Out of

Log 1.11 Reading Survey

Pts/20 x 5

5

Log 1.12 Reading Interview

Pts/20 x 5

5

Log 1.21 Drawing Pts/20 x 2

2

Log 1.22 Dictation Pts/20 x 2

2

Syllabi EDLIT 731: Assessment

Beginning, Intermediate & Advanced Readers

Rubricgrade

Out

ofLog 1.11 Reading Survey Pts/20 x

55

Log 1.12 Reading Interview

Pts/20 x 5

5

Log 1.21 Miscue Analysis Pts/25 x 5

5

Log 1.22 Running Record Pts/25 x 5

5

Logs 1.31-1.35 Self Assessment

Pts/25 x 10

10

Logs 1.41-1.43 Work Samples

Pts/15 x 5

5

Log 1.51 Test Pts/15 x 5

5

Log 1.52 Spelling Inventory

Pts/20 x 5

5

2.1/2.2 Report/Summary Pts/20 x 10

10

Total

55

42


Log 1.23 First Reading Pts/20 x 2

2

Log 1.24 Familiarity with Lit.

Pts/20 x 2

2

Log. 1.25 Book Handling

Pts/20 x 3

3

Log 1.26 Rdng a Prdctbl Book

Pts/20 x 3

3

Log 1.27 Retelling Pts/20 x 3

3

Logs 1.41-1.43 Work Samples

Pts/15 x 10

10

Log 1.51 Test Pts/15 x 4

4

Log 1.52 Spelling/Picture Sort

Pts/20 x 4

4

2.1/2.2 Report/Summary Pts/20 x 10

10

Total

55

______ out of 1005. Extra Credit Project

1.6 Child-led Portfolio Conference Pts/ X 3 _____out of 31.23 Running Record Pts/ X 1 _____out of 1

YOUR TOTAL POINTS: ________

Grades will be reported according to the following scale:97.5-100 points = A+ 80.0-82.4 points = B-92.5-97.4 points = A 77.5-79.9 points = C+90.0-92.4 points = A- 70.0-77.4 points = C87.5-89.9 points = B+ 0-69.9 points = F82.5-87.4 points = B



HUNTER COLLEGE OF THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORKDepartment of Curriculum and Teaching

EDLIT 732 Sec. 1 Prof. Alene L. SmithSpring 2002 e-mail: [email protected] Rm. 1002 W Tel.772-4667

CHILDREN’S LITERATURECourse outline

Course Overview

The purpose of this course is to provide teacher candidates with an in-depth exploration of children’s literature. To show how literature influences social, emotional, cognitive, moral and linguistic development of children; promotes an understanding and appreciation of other cultures; helps develop oral and written language in a variety of developmental contexts and for a range of developmental levels including special needs; provides enrichment for children from birth through sixth grade and reflects society past and present.

Teacher candidates will evaluate and select quality literature; study a range of genres, both narrative and expository; familiarize themselves with outstanding authors and illustrators and explore the uses of children’s literature in the classroom, home and community. Five hours in the field analyzing a literature-based activity is required.

Course Objectives

The course objectives for EDLIT 732 fulfill the following IRA Standards. Students will be able to:

1. Demonstrate a knowledge of many and varied genres of literature in classic and contemporary literature. (IRA Standard 2.12)

2. Help children expand their knowledge of all aspects of the language arts through literature. (IRA Standard 2.13)

3. Create a literate environment that fosters interest and growth in all aspects of literacy. (IRA Standard 5.1)

4. Judge the quality of children’s books using established evaluation criteria.

5. Use texts and trade books to stimulate interest, promote reading growth, and motivate learners to read for information. Pleasure, and personal growth. (IRA Standard 5.2)

6. Model and discuss reading and writing as valuable, lifelong activities. (IRA Standard 5.3)

7. Provide opportunities for learners to select from a variety of written materials, to read extended texts, and to read for many authentic purposes. (Standard 5.4)

8. Provide opportunities for creative and personal responses to literature, including storytelling. (IRA Standard 5.5)

9. Demonstrate a knowledge of the recent issues in the discipline of children’s literature.

10. Find literature for children with special needs.

11. Find literature which will help children recognize and respect all races, cultures and abilities. (IRA Standards 1.2, & 3.2)

12. Promote and develop research in children’s literature.

13. Demonstrate the use of computers as an aid in selecting literature.

Syllabi EDLIT 732: Children's Literature44


Text: Norton, Donna. Through The Eyes Of A Child. 5th ed. New York:Macmillan Pub. Co., 1999.

Date Topic Chapter

Feb. 4 Introduction, Understanding Development and Literature. Chaps. 1,2Language Arts Standards. Video: Patricia Polacco.Assign: Picture books for Feb. 11th

Feb. 1 Artists & Their Illustrations: Picture Books. The art of Chaps. 4,5storytelling. Assign: Roll Of Thunder for Feb. 20th

Feb. 18 President’s Day. Meet Wed. Feb. 20th.

Feb. 20 Contemporary Issues in Literature: Race, Gender, Age Chaps. 11 and Special Needs. Multicultural Books.Assign: Bring Folktales for Feb. 25th

Feb. 25 Traditional Literature. The function of Folk and Fairy Chap. 6Tales. Fables, legends, and myths. Assign: Biographies - Jean Fritz. Information Books forMar. 4th

Mar. 4 Workshop on Biographies and Information Books. Chap. 12Narrative and Expository writingAssign: Natalie Babbit. Tuck Everlasting for Mar. 11th

Mar. 11 Modern Fantasy Chap. 7Assign: In- class essay on Mar. 18th

Mar. 18 In Class EssayRead The Great Gilly Hopkins for Apr. 8th

Mar. 25 Spring Recess

Apr. 1 Thematic units. Ways to respond to literature. Creating anenvironment for literature.

Apr. 8 Modern Realistic Fiction. Censorship Chap. 9Assign: Internet use - article related to the use of Literature and Conflict Resolution for Apr. 15th

Apr. 15 Integrating technology and literature. Workshop in the Computer room.Assign: Elizabeth George Speare. The Witch of Blackbird

Pond. for Apr. 22nd

Apr. 22 Historical fiction. Chap. 10Relating literature to the Social StudiesAssign: Bring Poetry books for Apr. 29th

Apr. 29 Poetry. Using literature to expand the language arts. Chap. 8 Choral reading



May 6 Open theme. Evaluating and selecting literature. Chap. 3

May 13 Presentations.

Course Requirements

Each student will read 40 books. Twenty-five for the reaction paper, five for classroom discussion, five for the author study paper and five for miscellaneous assignments.

Roll of Thunder,Hear My Cry. Mildred D. Taylor Due. Feb. 20 Folktales

Due. Feb. 25Tuck Everlasting. Natalie Babbitt

Due: Mar. 11The Great Gilly Hopkins. Due: Apr. 8The Witch of Blackbird Pond. Elizabeth George Speare Due: Apr. 22

Reaction Paper Due: Apr. 29Read 25 books. Include six Caldecott and four Newbery Award or Honor Books. Write a five page reaction paper. Judge the books based on criteria used in class. Use a reference page to list the books used. Indicate: Author, Date, Title (underline or put in italics), city, and publisher. Also indicate the award won by the book.

In-class EssayTaken: Mar. 18

Author Study Due: Apr. 8

Each student will research an author, write a five page paper and present his/her author in class. Please read a minimum of 5 books. Visit the web to gather information about your author. The author/illustrator chosen must be approved by the instructor.

StorytellingEach student will tell a story in class.

Field Experience LogAll students must complete 5 hours of field experience . Failure Due: May 13to do so will result in an incomplete grade. Write a one page summary of an observation of a literature-based activity.See attached for the format of the report.

Conduct of CourseInformal, maximum participation; sharing; good attendance; and prompt completion of all assignments - late papers take a drop in grade. Please type all assignments.

GradingReaction Paper - 20%, In-Class Essay 30%, Author Study - 30%One page Field Experience Summary 10%, Class participation - 10%



EDLIT 733 Theories & Process of Teaching Writing

Fall, 2002Wed. 4:20 – 6:50 p.m., Rm. W1133

Dr. Yang HuOffice: W 1107Phone: 772-4753Email: [email protected] (open 7x24)Course Website: http://bb.hunter.cuny.eduOffice Hours: Mondays: 4: 45 - 6: 45 P.M.

Wednesdays: 3:00-4:00 P.M. And by appointment

COURSE OVERVIEW

This course has a double focus that enables us to study ourselves (1) as writers and (2) as teachers of writing. In order to accomplish this, our first goal is to establish a learning community in our class, which, as Cathy Short (1990) has described, is a community of learners who “(1) come to know each other; (2) value what each has to offer; (3) focus on problem solving and inquiry; (4) share responsibility and control; (5) learn through action, reflection, and demonstration; and (6) establish a learning atmosphere that is predictable and yet full of real choices.” (p. 35) Throughout the semester, the course participants are expected to live as a community of readers and writers -- examining our own histories as readers and writers, reading and talking about our reading, writing, sharing our writing and listening and responding to one another. To bring our two foci together, our classroom discussion will frequently focus on how our knowledge about ourselves as writers informs our teaching.

The course is designed around three broad areas of concern: (1) the understanding of the writing process; (2) the acquisition and use of skills and strategies to teach and manage the writing workshop; and (3) the knowledge of and the ability to help children understand and use the conventions of the English language.

This is a course for both beginning and experienced teachers who want to expand their knowledge and skills about the teaching of writing. We will study the findings of classroom-based research on the teaching of writing and how this information has evolved over the years. We will begin with ourselves as writers. Some of us already view ourselves as writers, many don’t, and we’ll all dive in together. Throughout the course, we will continue to work on our own writing and devote some class time to it. The idea that the writing teachers include their own writing in their repertoire of teaching is a powerful one. Our own writing not only gives us credibility with our students and ourselves, it also provides us with one of the most effective forms of instructional materials.

Our class format will vary, but will typically exist as writers workshops. The workshop format, interspersed with brief lectures, places us in the midst of the most effective teaching processes I have studied. We must learn the art of teaching writing by experiencing it, instead of just read about it.

Syllabi EDLIT 733: Writing47




COURSE OBJECTIVES

At the conclusion of this course, course participants will be able to:

Understand the writing process, the qualities of good writing and the development of children’s writing proficiency, including their spelling development. (IRA Standard 3.3)

Develop skills in evaluating, discussing and communicating about children’s writing development and in creating and conducting conferences and mini-lessons to respond to children as writers.

Employ effective techniques and strategies to manage the writing workshop; to teach and guide students to draft, revise, plan their writing according to different audiences and purposes, and improve the quality of their writing. (IRA Standards 9.1 and 9.2)

Teach students to edit their writing; and through editing and ongoing reading/writing, lead students to refine their spelling knowledge, to develop independent vocabulary acquisition, and to gain understanding of the meaning and importance of the conventions of standard written English. (IRA Standards 6.4, 6.5, 7.6, and 9.3)

REQUIRED TEXTSCalkins, L. 1994. The Art of Teaching Writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Fletcher, R. 1993. What A Writer Needs. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Heard, G. 1989. For the Good of the Earth and Sun. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

REQUIRED ARTICLES (To be given out in class)

Kirby, D. & Liner, T. 1988. Revision: the Student as Editor. Chapter 12 in Inside Out.

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Newkirk, T. 1989. Draw me a word, write me a picture. Chapter 2 in More Than Stories.

Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Rhodes, L. & Dudley-Marling, C. 1996. Transcription: Choices and instruction. Chapter 12 in

Readers and Writers with a Difference. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

RECOMMENDED BOOKS

Anderson, C. 2000. How’s It Going? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Fletcher, R. 1996. A Writer’s Notebook. New York: Avon Books.

Fletcher, R. 1999. Live Writing. New York: Avon Books.

Fletcher, R. 2000. How Writers Work. New York: Harper Trophy.

Fletcher, R. & Portalupi, J. 1998. Craft Lessons. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

Fletcher, R. & Portalupi, J. 2001. Nonfiction Craft Lessons. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

Harwayne, S. 2001. Writing Through Childhood. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.



Laminack, L., & Wood, K. 1996. Spelling in Use. Urbana, IL: National Council for Teachers of

English.

Snowball, D. & Bolton, F. 1999. Spelling K-8. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.

CLASS WEBSITE (http://bb.hunter.cuny.edu)

The class website has been created using Blackboard 5, which offers a course management system. The class site provides you with many useful functions such as announcements, course information, assignments, syllabus, Discussion Board, useful links, just to name a few. It is crucial for you to learn to use the course site, as you will be required to respond to Discussion Board questions and to your fellow students on the website. You must also set up forwarding email address so that you can receive email messages from me.

You are required to create a personal homepage on the class site. It is easy—just follow the directions and fill out some boxes. You will use the class website in the following ways:

7. Looking for and verifying course information: such as announcements, assignments, syllabus, etc.

8. Reading and downloading handouts, required and recommended articles and materials.

9. Participating in the Discussion Board activities.10. Keeping yourself up-to-date by checking the class website if you have to miss a

class.11. Communicating with me and other course participants via email and group

pages.12. Checking your grades.

To access the class site, you must have access to the Internet and an email address. If not, you can use the Hunter College computer lab and the email account issued to you free of charge by Hunter College. If you have any trouble accessing the website, please contact the Blackboard management at 650-3062. Here’s the procedure you need to follow to login to the class site.

1. Go to Class Website: http://bb.hunter.cuny.edu

2. Enter username: Your user name is your Hunter College E-mail login (e.g.” jsmith). Every Hunter student

is issued an E-mail account. I will pass around my roster for you to verify your user

name.

3. Enter password:Your password is ‘hc’ plus the last six digits of your student ID: e.g.: hc123456 (Password is case-sensitive. Make sure you use lower case.)





COURSE REQUIREMENTS

A. Class Attendance and Meaningful Participation (15%)

A significant portion of the course is to be learned through in-class demonstrations and collaborative work, such as writing and sharing, conferring with me and your peers, analyzing children’s writing samples, etc. Your active participation in and contribution to the activities of this class are essential and expected. (Participation means that you find your own ways to engage in the material and support other’s engagements.) Excused or unexcused absences may lower your final grade. If you have to miss two or more classes, please explore with me ways to make up for the classes.

You are expected to prepare for each class through critical, reflective reading of texts and other assigned readings. You will write in class, as well as bringing musings and finished drafts to share with your peers.

B. Discussion Board Participation on the Class Website (10%) Twice this semester, I will post questions on the Discussion Board of the class website. You will respond to the questions and to at least one fellow participant of the course. The questions will center around some of our reading assignments, demonstrations, personal writing processes, or our clinical activities. The discussion board provides us with an excellent forum to synthesize and stretch our thinking, and to share with each other our insights. The responses to the questions will be short, 1 to 2 pages, informal, reflective pieces that encourage you to read and write critically and creatively as you make connections to your own experiences as writers.

D. Personal Writing Portfolio (30%)The purpose of this assignment is not only to develop your abilities as a writer, but also to connect the teaching of writing with your personal experiences as a writer. Much of our own writing will happen in class. Therefore, the portfolio functions as a working document holder that would contain our own writing, including:

Your writer’s notebook Drafts of your own personal narrative

The writing of your own personal narrative also necessitates the work in small peer response groups. A portion of the class time will be devoted to working and conferring in the small group, where you will discuss and support each other’s writing processes, your growing understanding about yourselves as writers, and your reflections on the implications for teaching.

B. Clinical Activities (45%)As a program requirement, this course has a 15-hour field experience in the teaching of writing. The 15 hours out-of-class time will be needed for working throughout the semester getting to know your students as writers, understanding their writing processes, making decisions in instructional planning, conferring with students, teaching mini-lessons, and trying out strategies in your classroom.



The successful completion of the activities will hinge upon one crucial factor--that you get a writing workshop going in your own classroom as soon as possible. For those of you who are not teaching in a classroom setting, I suggest that you team up with a classmate who is teaching to do your work in the same classroom. As long as you get your students actively involved in the writing workshop, completing the Clinical Activities will be an integral part of your teaching and the whole process will not be as onerous. It is your responsibility to plan and make time for this experience. The Clinical Activities will satisfy the 15-hour field requirement, and they will result in the following:

Tab One: Profiles--3 Students as WritersWhich Students?

What do I need to collect from them?

What do I do with the writing samples?

What should I report based on my analysis of the writing samples?

Choose three students, each should represent the most motivated and fluent writer, the average writer and the reluctant/struggling writer.

Their notebooks containing at least 7 entries.

Or if you work with pre-k or primary grade students, collect their writing folder containing at least 7 pieces of drawing/writing.

Before you collect the writing samples, have a short conference with each student about their writing. Ask the child to talk about their writing: what kind of writers they are, and what kind of help they wish you as a teacher could provide.

Carefully study each student’s writing samples.

1. Attach one writing sample from each student2. Describe the child’s own perceptions and evaluations during the conference.3. Describe the range and choices of their topics/subject matter.4. Characterize their writing.5. Describe their fluency as writers.6. Come up with a needs assessment of each writer.

Tab Two: Drafting, Revision and EditingWhich Students?

What do I need to collect from the child?



Choose one student out of the three.

His/her first draft of a piece for publication.

Or if you work with pre-k or primary grade students, collect a

Have a conference with the child about the draft or the “seed-idea” piece. 1. Read the entire draft

with the child.2. Discuss and explore

the focus for revision.3. End with an action

plan appropriate for the child, and a deadline for the collection of a second draft.

1. Attach the child’s first and second drafts.

2. Document and describe what transpired during the conference.

3. Come up with a plan to teach a mini-lesson on drafting, or revision, or editing to the whole class based on what you have learned in the process.



“seed-idea” piece.

4. End with a short reflection of the entire process.

Tab Three: Spelling Development Study and Instructional PlanWhich Students?





His/her notebooks containing at least 7 entries, drafts.

Or if you work with pre-k or primary grade students, collect the child’s writing folder containing at least 7 pieces of drawing/writing.

Carefully study the writing samples to document the spelling development.

1. Describe the child’s spelling development as demonstrated by the writing samples.

2. Design a conference with the child, or a mini-lesson to teach the whole class based on your findings about the child’s spelling.

3. Conduct the conference or teach the mini-lesson. Document and describe how it went.

4. End with a short reflection of the entire process.

Tab Four: Vocabulary Development Study and Instructional PlanWhich Students?





His/her notebooks containing at least 7 entries, drafts.

Or if you work with pre-k or primary grade students, collect the child’s writing folder containing at least 7 pieces of drawing/writing.

Carefully study the writing samples to document the vocabulary development.

1. Describe the child’s vocabulary development as demonstrated by the writing samples.

2. Design a conference with the child, or a mini-lesson to teach the whole class based on your findings about the child’s vocabulary.

3. Conduct the conference or teach the mini-lesson. Document and describe how it went.

4. End with a short reflection of the entire



process.

Detailed guidelines will be posted on the class website under Assignments.E. Evaluation and Class Policy All assignments need to be completed and turned in on time or we lose the rhythm of our

work together. Assignments turned in late are subject to grade reductions. Late papers may be read only after other work has been taken care of. If you fall behind in your work, you need to see me immediately.

Assignments must be typed using 12 point type and 1 inch margins. Assignments will be evaluated in terms of quality, completeness, and timeliness. Each

assignment should provide the instructor with sufficient evidence that the concepts in the course have been understood and applied. This will require a synthesis of information from lectures, readings, class discussions, and personal experiences.

If your work is handed in with conceptual errors, or with missing components, it must be rewritten. Your grade on re-written work will be the average of the first grade and the second grade.

If you want your work returned to you with my comments, you need to (1), turn in two copies, and (2) not put your paper inside the sheet protectors.

Please turn in your work in a lightweight container—such as a manila folder, paper or soft plastic folder with pockets. I live in New Jersey and would appreciate it if you do not use the heavy hard cover ring binders.

Incomplete: There will be no incompletes given for this course unless (a), you have completed the majority of course requirements and assignments and (b), you must postpone the completion of the final requirements for medical or personal reasons beyond your control (reasons and emergencies must be legitimate and documented). You need to formally request the incomplete grade by meeting with me and filling out an incomplete request form detailing plans to complete the course. Hunter policy dictates that all work must be completed within one year after the end of this semester or the IN grade will become permanent.

COURSE OUTLINE

Date VII. Topics VIII. Assignments DueClass 19/4

Introduction and course overview. Getting to know each other as readers

and writers. Experiences, beliefs and assumptions:

Examining our own histories as writers. Establishing a learning community

Bring to class a favorite book and some writing samples that show who you are as a writer

Class 29/11

The writing workshop: the environment, rituals, routines, tools, and management

Fletcher, Ch. 1Calkins, Ch. 1 and 11

Class 39/18

Generating topics for writing Immersing students in literature

Calkins, Ch. 2, 3, 15, 17

Class 49/25

Assessing children’s writing development

Calkins, Ch. 19Newkirk, Ch. 2



Understanding the range of children’s writing

Class 510/2

Sharing Drafting Writing in the pre-k and primary grades

Calkins, Ch. 4 and 6Due: 1st draft of Personal Narrative (Please bring 2 copies)

Class 610/9

Revision I: Sense of audience and purposes

Kirby, Ch.12Due: Clinical Activities Tab One

10/16 Monday schedule. No classClass 7 10/23

Revision II: Learning and using qualities of good writing

Fletcher, Ch. 4Due: Responses to Discussion Board Question 1

Class 810/30

Mini-lessons: Responding to children’s needs as writers

Calkins Ch. 12Due: Personal Writing PortfolioDue by 11/2: Responses to Discussion Board Question 2

Class 911/6

Conferences: Listening, encouraging, marveling, nudging and coaching

Calkins, Ch. 13 and 14Due: Clinical Activities Tab Two

Class 1022/13

Transcription I: Spelling Rhodes, Ch. 12

Class 1111/20

Transcription II: Conventions of the English language

Calkins, Ch. 18

Class 1211/27

Helping reluctant and struggling writers Due: Clinical Activities Tab Three

Class 1312/4

Genre Study: Poetry Genre Study: Non-fiction

Heard, Ch. 2, 4, 5Calkins, Ch. 25

Class 1412/11

Genre study: Picture book Genre study: Memoir & autobiography

Calkins, Ch. 24Clinical Activities Tab Four

Class 1512/18

Reflections and celebrations

EDLIT 731 Keeping Track of Your Grade1. Class attendance/meaningful participation ______ out of 152. Discussion Board participation ______ out of 10

Responses to Questions I ______ out of 5

Responses to Questions II ______ out of 53. Personal Writing Portfolio ______ out of 304. Clinical activities ______ out of 45

______ out of 100Grades will be reported according to the following scale:

97.5-100 points = A+ 80.0-82.4 points = B-92.5-97.4 points = A 77.5-79.9 points = C+90.0-92.4 points = A- 70.0-77.4 points = C87.5-89.9 points = B+ 0-69.9 points = F82.5-87.4 points = B



Hunter CollegeCity University of New York

School of EducationDepartment of Curriculum and Teaching

COURSE OUTLINE Fall, 2002

Course: EDLIT 734.001: Literacy within the Disciplines (Code 4535). Includes 10 hours in a classroom focused on older learners and content area literacy

Co-Requisite: 1 credit special education course: Special Needs Issues in Literacies within the Curriculum

Meeting Time: Tuesdays, 4:20 – 6:50 (HW 707A)

Professor: Migdalia Romero, Ph.D.

Brief Description – Exploration into the literacy demands inherent in the academic subjects of math, science, health education, and social studies, as well as the arts. Includes 10 hours in classrooms focused on older learners (grades 3-6) and content area literacy.

Expanded Description – This course focuses on the structure and literacy demands of expository text and material used in content area classes. Teacher candidates will explore the ways in which language fosters and sometimes obfuscates meaning, how students process such materials, and the ways in which teachers can support learning across the disciplines and with diverse populations. Instructional strategies to support comprehension across the disciplines will be examined, including the use of narrative literature, the arts, and the community. Various forms of technology will be used to demonstrate their potential as tools in promoting literacy, comprehension, and content area learning. While the literacy demands across all grades will be considered, emphasis will be placed on grades 3-6.

Texts:Echevarria, Jana and Graves, Anne. (2002). Sheltered content instruction: Teaching English language learners with diverse abilities, 2/E. Boston: Allyn & Bacon

Short, K, et al. (1996). Learning together through inquiry: From Columbus to integrated curriculum. ME: Stenhouse Publishers

Whitin, Phyllis and Whitin, David J. (2000). Math is language too: Talking and writing in the mathematics classroom. VA: NCTE

Syllabi EDLIT 734: Literacies across the Disciplines55


DATE Topic Assignments DueSeptember 3: Module 1: Theoretical considerations

Language, literacy and learning;ELA standards – comprehension & expository text

Rdgs: E&G Ch 1,2, 7; Short, Ch 1, 2, 7 W&W, Ch 1

September 10 Structure and literacy demands of expository text;

FBA: Analysis of learning talk (BB entry)

September 17 No Class. Monday ScheduleSeptember 24 Analysis and comparison of

multiple literaciesRdg: W&W, Ch 3

October 1: Module 2: Instructional considerations: Curr’m planning

Inquiry based learning; Thematic Unit Planning

Rdgs: Short, Ch 3, 5, 8; W&W, Ch 4;FBA: Analysis of expository text (Group)

October 8 Environmental and literacy support for meaning/ learning

Rdgs: E&G, Ch 3, 4; Short, Ch 4;W&W, Ch 2

October 15 No class. Monday ScheduleOctober 22 Media, community, and

technology resources to support comprehension

Rdg: Short, Ch 6FBA: Unit plan outline (Group)

October 29 Reading and study strategies to support learning from expository text

Rdg: E&G, Ch 5;Short, Ch 8FBA: Review support materials (Gp)

November 5: Module 3: Aesthetic Literacy

Lincoln Center Pre-performance workshop

November 12 Lincoln Center Production: “Fire on the Mountain”

Rdg: Maxine Greene TBA

November 19 Aesthetic education across disciplines: creating, inquiring, responding, making connections

Rdg: E&G, Ch 6

Nov. 26: Module 2 (cont’d): Instructional considerations: Lesson planning

Pre-planning and pre-reading FBA: Aesthetic ed’n paper (Ind)

December 3 Reading and post-reading FBA: Research report; Lesson plan

December 10 Last Class: Shared reflections on practice

Rdg: E&G, Ch 8;Short, Ch 9FBA: Auto-critique and reflection on practice

December 17 Final / Literacy Fair Poster Session

FBA: Unit plan presentations



COURSE OBJECTIVES

Knowledge: The teacher candidate will be able to: • Explain the relationship between language and learning, and understand why students have difficulty in processing expository text.

• Describe the literacy demands of different disciplines.

• Identify multiple sources and forms of data to supplement content area textbooks.

Skills: The teacher candidate will be able to: • Differentiate the linguistic forms, functions, and content of expository text in the different disciplines, and describe the literacy demands inherent in each. (IRA Standard 7.5)

• Use a variety of strategies and multiple mediums to prepare students for organizing and remembering information and for getting meaning from expository text. (IRA Standard 8.4)

• Prepare and adapt curriculum materials and instructional approaches to support the development of literacy across the curriculum with diverse populations including students for whom English is a second language and students with special needs. (IRA Standard 7.2 and 8.3)

• Develop instructional environments that support multiple forms of literacy.

• Promote the integration of language arts in all content areas. (IRA Standard 5.6)

• Analyze and use instructional and informational technology, and the arts to support the development of literacy learning across the disciplines. (IRA Standard 5.7)

• Use multiple sources and forms of data (trade books, primary sources, fiction) to supplement content area textbooks, thereby stimulating interest, fostering appreciation for the written word, and increasing the motivation of learners to read widely for information and personal growth. (IRA Standard 8.1)

Dispositions: The teacher candidate will: • View teaching as a process of continual growth, where every teaching event is an opportunity for reflection and professional development.

• Demonstrate an appreciation for the resources in the community (families, agencies, businesses, museums) that can be used in the development of multiple literacies.

• Value technology and the arts as tools and mediums that support literacy across the disciplines.



COURSE CONTENT

Module 1: Theoretical Considerations • Overview of content area learning: the learner, the text, and talk

• Linguistic and cultural considerations in processing academic content

• Relationship between language (oral and written) and learning

• Expository vs. narrative text; academic vs. social discourse; reading to learn vs. learning to read - Overview of differences

• Forms, Functions, and Content of Expository Text & their Literacy Demands Mathematical and Scientific LiteracySocial Science Literacy Aesthetic and Media Literacy (visual, musical, movement)

• Skills needed in learning from expository text

• Interface between ELA and discipline-specific standards

Module 2: Instructional Considerations in Using Expository Text • Thematic unit planning and lesson planning in an inquiry based curriculum

• Establishing a supportive learning environment: Using extra-curricular resources to extend learning and thinking: (Eg. Family, community, the internet, the arts, media, and children’s literature)

• Planning for content area learning (analysis of text; preparation of students; adaptation of text, graphic representation of information)

• Instructional strategies to support comprehension (pre-reading, reading, post-reading, study guides, writing to learn) and monitor growth

• Study skills instruction (note-taking, graphic organization)

• Curriculum adaptation for diversity

Module 3: Aesthetic Literacy• Nature and role of aesthetic literacy across the disciplines

• Aesthetic literacy as a conduit for creating, inquiring, responding, making connections across the disciplines

• Appreciation and use of the arts as a way to promote understanding about the world and its people, solve problems, express oneself, and represent experience.



FIELD-BASED ASSIGNMENTS

1. Reflection on and Analysis of Practice (20% of grade) TCs will keep a reflective journal, making weekly entries that focus on the ways that the content and theory covered in class are exemplified in their classrooms and in observations made of their peers. Reflections on literacy environments and lessons will be shared in class and through BB. More formal reflections will be required of TCs from audio- or video- taped content area lessons. TCs will prepare written reports reflecting on the strengths and weaknesses of the lesson, the way language was used by students in learning and by the teacher in promoting motivation and comprehension. TCs will also comment on alternative instructional strategies, activities, and mediums that could have been used. On-going and used for classroom discussion. Summary due 12/10

2. Observation of Students and Analysis of Learning Talk (10% of grade) TCs will observe children as they use language to learn and teachers as they use language to teach academic content. Observations of instructional events will be focused on specific and critical dimensions of the learning process including, but not limited to questioning, paraphrasing, praise, engagement, handling disruptions, and referencing students’ prior knowledge. TCs will be asked to reflect on good and poor examples of teacher and student talk, and to support their evaluation by making reference to theory. Observations and citations will be shared on Blackboard (BB). Due: September 10

3. Analysis of Expository Text (10% of grade) Teams of TCs will examine content area textbooks from grades 3-6 in math, science, social studies, or health. They will analyze the structure and literacy demands of the expository text of different disciplines, comparing and contrasting their content, form, and functions and the literacy skills that are needed for students to read them with comprehension. They will also compare them to narrative text used to teach reading and tell stories. BB will be used to research the topic, communicate within the group, and share findings with the rest of the class.

Due: October 1

4. Unit Plan and Poster Session (20% of grade)Groups of TCs will prepare a unit plan to accompany a theme taken from one of the academic disciplines. The unit plan must include:

– A profile of the class with whom the unit will be used – ELA and content standards to be addressed - The background “KISE” of students that will be tapped- A bibliography of supplementary materials, including commercial videos, software

programs, internet resources, other forms of media, the arts, and trade books to be used in support of the unit

- Community resources that will be used- Graphic organizers to support content learning

In addition the group will prepare a poster display of the unit. The display must include the original expository text reading/ unit, and the materials and texts used to enhance learning.

Due: Oct. 22nd –draft of unit; Dec. 17th - poster session



5. Analysis of Supportive Instructional Materials (15% of grade) Teams of TCs, organized by discipline, will review and evaluate supplementary literacy materials related to their thematic unit. Materials should include different genres, commercial videos, instructional technology, artifacts, and web-sites. BB will be used to communicate within the group and to share findings with the rest of the class. This review will be done as part of the group's unit plan. Due: October 29

6. Reflection on Aesthetic Education (10% of grade)TCs will prepare a response to their LCI experience. This can take the form of a reaction paper, a position paper, a reflective paper, or a lesson plan.

Due: November 26

7. Development of an expository text lesson plan (15% of grade) TCs will plan a lesson that incorporates pre-reading, reading, and post-reading strategies. Lessons will be developed that (1) prepare students for reading expository text and that (2) reflect the knowledge, interests, skills, and experiences the student brings to the discipline under study. Exemplary lessons will be shared with the class through BB.

Due: December 3

8. Extra credit research report (10% of grade) Teacher candidates will review an article on content area reading in a professional journal that focuses on the ways in which literacy and comprehension are promoted or thwarted in content area classes. The summary should make up only one half of the report. The second part of the report should focus on the implications of the theory for classroom practice. Reviews will be placed on the class web page. Due: December 3



RECOMMENDED READINGS

Adamson, H.D. (1993). Academic competence: theory and classroom practice: preparing ESL students for content courses. Longman. NY

Camp, Deanne. (2000, February). It takes two: Teaching with twin texts of fact and fiction. The Reading Teacher. Vol. 53. No. 5. IRA. 400-408.

Cantoni-Harvey, G. (1987). Content-area language instruction: Approaches & strategies. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. MA

Carrasquillo, A.L. & Rodriguez, V. (1995). Language minority students in the mainstream classroom. Multilingual Matters Ltd. Philadelphia, PA

Cecil, Nancy Lee and Lauritzen, P. (1994). Literacy and the arts for the integrated classroom: Alternative Ways of Knowing. Longman. NY

Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., and Short, D. (2000). Making content comprehensible for English language learners: The SIOP model. Allyn & Bacon. Boston. MA

Freeman, E.B. & Person, D.G.. (1998). Connecting informational children’s books with content area learning. Allyn & Bacon. MA

Hyerle, David. (199 ). Visual tools for constructing knowledge. ASCD. Alexandria, VA. Jacobson, Jeanne M. (199 ). Content area reading: Integration with the language arts. Delmar

Publishers. NYMohan, B.A. (1986). Language and content. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company. MAMoore, D.W., Moore, S.A., Cunningham, P.M., & Cunningham, J.W.. (199 ). Developing readers

and writers in the content areas K-12. Longman. NYOhanian, S.. (1996). Math as a way of knowing. Stenhouse Publishers. MEPeregoy, S.F., & Boyle, O.F.. (1993). Reading, writing, & learning in ESL: A resource book for

K-8 teachers. Longman. NYSanta, C.M. & Alvermann, D.E. (Eds.) (1991). Science learning; Processes and applications.

International Reading Association. Newark, DEVacca, R.T. & Vacca, J. L. (1999). Content area reading: literacy and learning across the

curriculum, 6 th edition . Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers. NY Wepner, S.B., Valmont, W.J. & Thurlow, R. (Eds.) (2000). Linking literacy and technology. A

guide for K-8 classrooms. International Reading Assn. Newark, Del. Wood, K.D., Lapp, D. & Flood, J. (1993). Guiding readers through text: a review of study guides.

International Reading Association. Newark, DEYopp, Ruth H. and Yopp, Hallie K. (2001). Literature-based reading activities. 3rd ed. Allyn &

Bacon. Boston.



Hunter College of the City University of New YorkDepartment of Curriculum and Teaching

EDLT 735 Instructional Approaches to Literacy: Fall 2002 K through grade 6

Mondays 4:20 – 6:50, Room 1116

Deborah Ann Jensen Office Hours:West Building, Room 904 Mondays: 3:15 to 4:15212-722-4659 6:50 to 7:[email protected] or [email protected] Tuesdays: 11:00 to 12:30

or by appointment

COURSE DESCRIPTION:This course offers a broad overview of the development of literacy instruction, materials and curriculum from historical and research perspectives related to current on-going classroom practices. The variety of approaches to literacy instruction are discussed including how relevant reading research from general education has influenced literacy education as well as how knowledge of past and present literacy leaders and their contributions contribute to the knowledge base.

COURSE OBJECTIVES:Knowledge: The teacher candidate will:

1. identify the historical, theoretical, and research bases on the development of literacy curriculum (IRA Standards 2.10 and 2.11)

2. explain the variety of indicators that can be employed when evaluating curriculum for literacy learning (IRA Standard 12.5)

Skills: The teacher candidate will:1. adapt literacy instructional approaches, materials, and curriculum to met the needs of

different learners to accomplish different purposes based on research findings and interpretation (IRA Standard 12.4)

2. select and evaluate instructional materials, curriculum and approaches to and for literacy, including those that are technology based by using theory, research, and historical understandings (IRA Standard 11.5)

3. demonstrate kill in communicating information about literacy to various constituencies in the community and school (IRA Standard 11.4)

Dispositions: The teacher candidate will1. value the pursuit of one’s own knowledge through reading professional journals and

participating in professional activities, including conferences (IRA Standard 16.1)2. value technology as a tool and a medium for supporting literacy acquisition3. value collaboration with colleagues, parents, and communities as resources for enhancing

literacy instruction and acquisition

REQUIRED TEXTSBalmuth, M. (1992). The roots of phonics: A historical introduction. Timonium, MD: York Press.Farstrup, A. E. & Samuels, S. J. (Eds). (2002) What research has to say about reading

instruction, 3rd Ed. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS:

1. Participation and involvement in class discussions and activities. You are required to attend, be prepared and participate in class. Your knowledge of the material and your involvement are a necessary component for the success of this course. Attendance will be taken.

2. Self-Assessment Due October 7, 2002 – 25%

Syllabi EDLIT 735: Instructional Approaches62




Beginning with your earliest memories of reading and being read to, retrace your experiences as a reader up to and including the present time. As you think of these experiences, include the following information:

The kinds of books you read or that were read to you at particular ages. If you can’t remember specific titles and authors, describe the plots, characters, themes or content you can recall

Your reading or lack of reading when you first became and independent reader. What you read or what was read to you both at school and at home during your elementary years. Don’t be embarrassed if no one read to you or if you didn’t read. Just write about your lack of reading in your life.

Facts and feelings about what you read as you moved through the grades up to and including high school and college

The people (family members, teachers, librarians, friends, others) who either turned you off or turned you on to reading and why

Places you acquire(d) books The feelings and sensations you associate(d) with reading.

Write a paper on your reading autobiography. Put your development into chronological order so that your autobiography reviews the stages you have gone through as a reader. In the final section, review your personal history as a reader and discuss how your own experience influences you as a teacher.

As you write your autobiography be candid and honest. Although the paper is informal, your writing must be clear. Yes, grammar, spelling, and punctuation do count! It should be a minimum of 5 pages.

3. Classroom Newsletters – Due September 23rd and October 21st, 2002 -

The importance of a home-school connection cannot be minimized. You will read that researchers found that the type of material sent home by teachers influences parental literacy interactions with their children.

This semester you will design and send home two newsletters to the parents of the children in your class. The newsletter will be of your own design and may include student work, announcements about class/school events, give homework tips or assignments, or other things of your choosing. However, each newsletter must include a description and rationale of literacy activities you will be doing with your students during the following month and suggestions for parental involvement, which will help the students. It is also important for you to know students prior knowledge and any home based activities, etc that may enhance classroom instruction. Your newsletter will somehow request this information from parents.

Each newsletter will be worth 15% of your grade

Newsletter Reflection – Due December 2nd, 2002 – 10%

Based on your reading, class discussion, and use of newsletters in your classroom, write a three to five page reflection on this experience. Include a critique of your newsletters, reactions from parents (or lack of), things you learned, and things you would change if you were to use newsletters again.

4. Book Clubs (on-going) Reflective Journal Due December 16th, 2002 15%

Teachers are not usually given the opportunity to discuss their professional readings and learning with their colleagues. A teacher’s own growth and professional development is often done in isolation. For



the first 30 minutes of class you will be a member of a professional book club. Your purpose is to discuss the readings for the course before we meet as a whole class. For your book club you will

A. keep a log of your reading, detailed and dated. This is not a summary of your reading but personal and professional reactions to the readings and questions and curiosities that occurred to you as a result of the reading.

B. reactions, thoughts of your weekly discussions

5. Observational Analysis – Due December 9th, 2002 25%

Using multiple indicators and current research evidence, you will evaluate the instruction and instructional materials being used by a particular learner or group of learners. During the semester you will observe a class during literacy/reading/ language arts instruction for a minimum of 4 hours. Take detailed observational notes (describe what is happening, the questions asked, the actions, etc. without any judgments). These will be the appendix for your paper. What did you observe? What concepts, suggestions, theories, etc. from your readings was evident during your observations? What seemed to be missing? What materials were used? Do you feel they were adequate? How were students accommodated?

COURSE EVALUATIONGrades will be assigned on the basis of the scale presented in the Hunter Graduate Catalog on page 11.

TENTATIVE SCHEDULEAll readings must be completed for the date on the schedule

September 9 IntroductionExpectations and Responsibilities

September 16 No Classes Scheduled

September 17 Tuesday - Follow a Monday ScheduleResearch on Reading, ConstructivismFarstrup and Samuels: Introduction, Chapters 1 & 2

September 23 Newsletter # 1DueHome-School Connections, Early LiteracyFarstrup and Samuels, Chapters 3 & 4

September 30 Phonics and Phonemic AwarenessFarstrup and Samuels, Chapter 5 & 6Balmuth, Introduction, Chapters 1 – 4

October 7 Self-Assessment DueHistorical Perspective of EnglishBalmuth, Chapters 5 – 17

October 14 Columbus Day - College is Closed

October 16 Wednesday – Follow a Monday ScheduleWords, Concepts, Vocabulary, and Reading FluencyFarstrup and Samuels, Chapters 7 and 8Balmuth, Chapters 18 – 27

October 21 Newsletter #2 DueContent Area ReadingFarstrup and Samuels, Chapter 9



October 28 Comprehension StrategiesFarstrup and Samuels, Chapters 10 & 11

November 4 Reading/Learning Disabilities: Environmental?Farstrup and Samuels Chapter 12

November 11 Metacognition: What do you think?Farstrup and Samuels, Chapter 13

November 18 Electronic Text and TechnologyFarstrup and Samuels, Chapter 14

November 25 Assessment vs EvaluationFarstrup and Samuels, Chapter 15

December 2 Newsletter Reflection DueTest-takingFarstrup and Samuels, Chapter 16

December 9 Observational Analysis DueDiverse PopulationsFarstrup and Samuels, Chapter 17

December 16 Reflective Journal DueDiscussion of Observation Analysis

December 23 Wrap Up Session



EDLIT 736: Diagnosis of Reading Difficulties

Prerequisites: EDLIT 733: Theories and Processes of Writing: Pre-K through grade 6EDLIT 734: Literacies within the Disciplines: K through grade 6EDLIT 735: Instructional approaches to literacy: K through grade 6

Course Descriptions:Brief Description: A study of factors related to students who are experiencing difficulty acquiring literacy. Procedures for diagnosing reading achievement and related language skills. Includes 15 hours of individual diagnosis, under supervision, of students with reading difficulties.

Expanded Description: This course is designed to help teacher candidates identify and provide diagnosis for students who show signs of having difficulty with reading, as well as to prepare appropriate diagnostic reports to other professionals and to parents. Through diagnostic assessments, cultural diversity will be considered, as well as giftedness and special needs. Methods of applying diagnostic assessment procedures with both individuals and groups are included. The wide range of possible causative factors, including dyslexia, is explored through examination of literature on the topic.

Writing Requirements: Writing assignments will include a case study report of a student with reading difficulties, two brief reports to school and parents, and a 2,000 word paper on the causation of reading difficulties, based on relevant research and writings.

Rationale:This course is a required course within the Masters in Literacy (Birth to Grade 6) Professional Certificate Program. According to New York State regulations this certificate program must include: ...an understanding of difficulties that may be confronted in acquiring the literacy skills of …reading; …and the principles and practices of assessing student literacy performance….Assessing students' literacy performance, including but not limited to identifying dyslexia….” (pp. 59-60 of New Standards for Programs Preparing Classroom Teachers, 1999, Albany, NY: State Department of Education).

Course ObjectivesKnowledge: Teacher candidates will be able to:

List and evaluate various theories of the causation of reading difficulties and with a cohesive essay based on the collation of readings in a wide range of professional sources. (IRA Standard 4.1)

Skills: Teacher candidates will be able to: Administer, score, interpret, compare and integrate standardized and informal assessments

necessary to arrive at a cohesive picture of the reading strengths and needs of students how are having difficulty in reading. (IRA Standard 4.2)

Collate the results of a reading diagnostic study and present written reports, emphasizing major reading strengths, needs and interests, as well as offering suggestions for initiating an individualized program of remedial reading. (IRA Standard 4.4)

Dispositions: Teacher candidates will be able to: Convey the results of the diagnostic study to parents in a positive, helpful manner. (IRA

Standard 11.1)Content Outline:

Topic Approximate Time Spenta) Introduction: Goals and background One sessionof diagnostic assessment and the diagnosticrelationship. Ways to set up an appropriate environmentb) Ascertaining students' backgrounds and Two sessionsinterests. Developing an interest inventory.c) Word identification assessment: Purposes Two sessions

Syllabi EDLIT 736: Diagnosis66


methods, administration, scoring, interpretation,use of results.d) Oral reading assessment, including informal Two sessionsreading inventories: Purposes, methods,administration, scoring, interpretation, use and comparison of results.e) Silent reading assessment, including standardized Two sessionsand spelling tests: Purposes, formats,administration, scoring, interpretation, use of results.f) Miscellaneous special assessment, e.g. auditory: Two sessionstrial lessonsg) Integration of collected data, using class Two sessionscase studies.h) Causation of reading difficulties: Issues, One sessionfindings, conclusions.i) Communicating to children, parents One sessionand to other professionals about the diagnosis and the diagnostic findings

Course Organization and Supporting Information: Each three-hour class session will combine one-hour diagnostic work with students at the Hunter College Reading Center (individual tutoring rooms are provided) with seminars that include discussion, demonstration, case presentations, and practice with diagnostic material. In addition, each teacher candidate will replicate the diagnostic procedures with another student, on the outside, often a student in the teacher candidate's own class. Diagnostic assessment with groups and classes will be addressed similarly, through demonstration and practice.

Required Readings: Roswell, F. G. & Chall, J. S. (1999). Reading difficulties: Effective methods and successful teaching.

Elizabethtown, PA: Continental.

Recommended Readings: Barr, R., Sadow, M., & Blachomicz, C. (1990). Reading diagnosis for teachers. New

York, NY: Longman.Flippo, R. F. (1997). Reading assessment and instruction: A Qualitative approach to diagnosis for

teachers. New York, NY: Harcourt Brace.Leslie, L. & Caldwell. (1995). Qualitative reading inventory—II. New York, NY: Harper Collins.Lipson, J. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1991). Assessment and instruction of reading disability: an interactive

approach. New York, NY: Harper Collins.Roskos, K., & Walker, B. J. (1994). Interactive handbook for understanding reading diagnosis. New York,

NY: Merrill.Woods, M. L., & Moe, A. J. (1999). Analytical reading inventory. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Methods of evaluation: Aggregate of the results of:1) Case studies of the test administration and interactions, valid interpretations and conclusions 60%2) Paper on the causation of reading difficulties: thorough, balanced, focused paper 25%3) Reports to parents and schools: factual, informative, professional style 15%

Syllabi EDLIT 736: Diagnosis67


EDLIT 737: Practicum in Remedial Reading

Prerequisites: EDLIT 736 Diagnosis of Reading Difficulties

Course Descriptions:Brief Description: Theoretical consideration and procedures in the instruction of students with reading difficulties. Includes 20 hours of supervised remedial sessions with individual students on-site at Hunter College.

Expanded Description: Teacher candidates will study and carry out methods of working with student with reading difficulties, generally with the same two students whose needs were diagnosed in the previous course on diagnosis. This is also an emphasis on the selection and development of the appropriate materials for remedial instruction. Cultural and linguistic diversity will be considered in relations to the students being helped. Students with special needs, including the gifted, will be addressed.

Writing Requirements: Writing assignments will include a projected term plan based on students' ascertained interests, strengths, and needs; weekly lesson plans for each student; final case study reports; and two brief reports to school and parents.

Rationale:This course is a required course within the Masters in Literacy (Birth to Grade 6) Professional Certificate Program. According to New York State regulations this certificate program must include: ...an understanding of difficulties that may be confronted in acquiring the literacy skills of …reading; …providing appropriate instruction for students experiencing difficulty in acquiring literacy skills; and providing literacy services to students in compensatory or special education programs; …communicating information about literacy to various groups;…and communicating assessment results to parents, caregivers and school personnel….” (pp. 59-60 of New Standards for Programs Preparing Classroom Teachers, 1999, Albany, NY: State Department of Education).


Understand short-term as well as long-range reading needs of students with reading difficulties. (IRA Standard 4.3)

Skills: Teacher candidates will be able to: Locate and select appropriate activities and materials to address the interests of students with

reading difficulties. (IRA Standard 12.7) Select appropriate materials and provide instruction in a wide range of such reading skills and

sub-skills as phonemic awareness, phonic, comprehension, vocabulary development, study skills, content area reading and reading rate for students with reading difficulties, always aware of the incredible richness of the strengths and backgrounds of such students. (IRA Standards 6.1, 6.2, and 6.3)

Dispositions: Teacher candidates will be able to: Sensitively and helpfully communicate with the parents and teachers of students with reading

difficulties. Content Outline:

Topic Approximate Time Spent

Introduction: Goals and format Two sessionsof projected term plan.Instructional skills file: goals and format

Remediation for primary levels. Three sessionsApproaches to word identificationtechniques, developing a sight recognitionvocabulary, comprehension, and motivation.

Syllabi EDLIT 737: Remedial Reading68


Remediation of intermediate levels. Three sessionsComprehension, vocabulary development,expansion of reading styles and motivation.

Remediation of study skills and content area Two sessionsreading.

Remediation of slow reading rate One session

Parent communication and interviews. One sessionWriting remediation reports

Review of case studies. Presentations by Two sessionsTeacher candidates of the work with their students

Examination of Practicum Skills Files. One sessionSharing ideas and materials.

Course Organization and Supporting Information: Each three-hour class session will start with the teacher candidate providing students with one-hour of individual remediation, to be followed by a two-hour seminar with lecture, discussion, consultation, demonstration, and role-playing. Teacher candidates will submit weekly lesson plans for each student. In addition, teacher candidates will develop a file of instructional material and ideas, to be a long term resource for remedial reading. Reports to parents and to other professionals will be planned and implemented.

Required Readings: Chankar, J. L. & Ekwall, E. E. (1998). Locating and correcting reading difficulties (7th ed.). Upper Saddle

River, NJ: Merrill.Heilman, A. W. (1998). Phonics in proper perspective (8th Ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.

Recommended Readings: Rasinski, T., & Padak, N. (2000). Effective reading strategies: Teaching children who find reading

difficult (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.Gillet, J. W., & Temple , C. (2000). Understanding reading problems: Assessment and instruction (5th ed.).

New York, NY: Longman.McCormick, S. (1999). Instructing students who have literacy problems (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ:

Merrill.

Methods of evaluation: Aggregate of the results of:1) Projected term plan 15%4) Weekly remedial plans and logs 40%5) Practicum skills file 25%6) Final report of remedial program 10%7) Reports to parents/schools 10%

Syllabi EDLIT 737: Remedial Reading69


EDLIT 738: Literacy Programs Organization and Resources

Prerequisites: EDLIT 737: Practicum in remedial reading

Course Descriptions:Brief Description: Seminar of a survey of literacy programs in diverse settings utilizing a range of techniques and organizational approaches in the literacy instruction of students, with and without discernible reading difficulties. Includes 15 hours of survey for the enhancement of literacy programs.

Expanded Description: Skills for organizing and enhancing literacy programs, both developmental and remedial, are addressed through visits and in-depth surveys of on-going programs, with sensitivity to procedures for students with special needs, including giftedness. The course is also designed to integrate theory and practice in remedial reading. Teacher candidates work in pairs with small groups of remedial readers at the Hunter College Reading Center, using the structure of teacher and paraprofessional.

Writing Requirements: Writing assignments will include completion of a project in the form of a written description/survey of an on-going school developmental literacy program and of an on-going remedial program; written logs of each session with a group of students at the Hunter College Reading Center; written report of the semester's work with the group and with each student; and written reports to school and parents of each student.

Rationale:This course is a required course within the Masters in Literacy (Birth to Grade 6) Professional Certificate Program. According to New York State regulations this certificate program must include: ...proficiency in organizing and enhancing literacy programs, including but not limited to: communicating information about literacy to various groups;…and communicating assessment results to parents, caregivers, and school personnel….” (pp. 59-60 of New Standards for Programs Preparing Classroom Teachers, 1999, Albany, NY: State Department of Education).


Apply research to plan and implement ways to improve on-going developmental literacy and remedial programs. (IRA Standards 12.6 and 14.1)

Supervise and coordinate services associated with these programs. (IRA Standard 12.3)Skills: Teacher candidates will be able to:

Plan for, observe, train and evaluate the work of a paraprofessional or other minimally trained support person in the organization and instruction a small group of students with reading difficulties. (IRA Standards 15.1, 15.2, and 15.3)

Dispositions: Teacher candidates will be able to: Demonstrate a willingness and appreciation for collegial discussions interactions in utilizing

the services of and supporting the work of a paraprofessional, a student teacher, or any other adult in an on-going program of remedial reading. (IRA Standards 15.4 and 16.6)

Model ethical behavior for those who work with children. (IRA Standard 13.6)

Content Outline:

Topic Approximate Time Spent

Introduction and planning for Semester's work. Grouping for supervision Two sessions Planning individual program evaluations

Principles of program planning and implementation Four sessions Providing support and coordination

Observation and evaluation procedures for supervision Two sessions

Syllabi EDLIT 738: Literacy Programs70


Working with paraprofessionals, planning and support Two sessions

Working in a school as a reading teacher: Responsibilities, Two sessionsethics, interpersonal relationships.

Presentations/Sharing Three sessions

Course Organization and Supporting Information: Each three-hour class session will start with the teacher candidate providing students with one-hour of individual remediation, to be followed by a two-hour seminar with lecture, discussion, demonstration, and role-playing. Teacher candidates will submit weekly lesson plans for each student. In addition, teacher candidates will develop a file of instructional material and ideas, to be a long term resource for remedial reading.

Required Readings: Stanovich, Keith. (2000). Progress in understanding reading: Scientific foundation and new frontiers.

New York, NY: Guilford.

Recommended Readings:Allington, R. L. & Cunningham, P. M. (1996). Schools that work: Where all children can read and write.

New York, NY: Harper Collins.Erickson, L. G. (1995). Supervision of reading programs. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Labuda, M. (Ed.). (1985). Creative Reading for Gifted Learners. Newark, DE: Inernational Reading

Association.Radencich, M. C. (1995). Administration and supervision of the Reading/Writing Program. Boston, ally &

Bacon.Samuels, S. J. & Pearson, P. D. (1988). Changing school reading programs. Newark,

DE: International Reading Association.Shanahan, T. (Ed.). (1994). Teachers thinking, teachers knowing: Reflection on literacy and language

education. Urbana, IL: National Conference on Research in English: National Council of Teachers of English.

Thomas, K. J. & Moorman, G. B. (1983). Designing Reading Programs. Dubuque, IL: Kendall/Hunter.

Methods of evaluation: Aggregate of the results of:1) Supervisor log of group remedial sessions and follow-up conferences 30% 2) Reports on school and remedial programs 20 + 20 = 40%3) Design a plan for a paraprofessional to work with a small group of struggling readers, including

performance evaluation, plan for support and training indications.

Syllabi EDLIT 738: Literacy Programs71


Hunter College

Department of Curriculum and Teaching

Spring 2002

EDLIT 739.01

Delays in Early Language and Literacy Development in Young Children With Special Needs

Instructor: Verena ValckOffice:E-mail: [email protected] Hours: Tuesdays 6:30 – 7:00

COURSE DESCRIPTION:This course presents historical, theoretical, and research based teaching practices issues related to literacy and language instruction for children with special needs, ages birth through five.

COURSE OBJECTIVES: Describe public policy and laws, which provide young children with special needs the right to early

intervention and related services. (IRA Standard 3.5) Identify characteristics of children with various disabilities and recognize the influence those characteristics

have on emergent language, learning and literacy. Demonstrate an understanding of various language intervention methods and/or modalities. Develop instructional environments that support language, learning, and literacy acquisition for all

children, including children with special needs. (IRA Standard 3.4, 12.1, and 12.2)

COURSE CONTENT AND SCHEDULE:

9/03 Historical Overviewa. Young children with disabilities prior to 1975b. Public Policy and the Laws: 1975- to presentc. Early Intervention Service Delivery Modelsd. The Individual Family Service Plan

Activities: small group presentation of IFSP

9/10 Children With Disabilitiese. Disabilities identified by IDEAf. Mental retardationg. Pervasive Developmental Disordersh. Emotional disturbancei. Substance Abusej. Medical disabilities

Readings: assigned article on a disability. Activities: Jigsaw Groups

9/24 Language Development Birth to Fivea. Children’s cognitive learning from birth to 2 years

Syllabi EDLIT 739.01: Early Intervention72



b. Typical language development of young childrenc. Delays and disorders in the language development process

Readings: Children’s Early Linguistic LearningActivities: Group discussions of language samples

Assignment due: disabilities summary

10/01 Language Interventiona. Early identification of language disordersb. Language intervention modelsc. Language intervention for pre-linguistic and nonverbal children

Readings: assigned article on language interventionActivities: Jigsaw Groups

Video discussion

Assignment due: analysis of language sample

10/08 Early Literacy Development and Instructiona. Issues in emergent literacy for children with language impairmentsb. Preschool prevention of reading failurec. Natural Literacyd. Inclusive classrooms

Readings: to be announcedAssignment due: language intervention summary

*Literacy Lesson Plan will be due the following Thursday after the last class. Please drop off at the Curriculum and Teaching Office, room 1023 West Building.

Grading System:

Summaries 15 eachLanguage Sample Analysis 30% 30Literacy Lesson Plan 30Class participation 10*Regular attendance, on-time assignments, and class participation are part of your course grade. If your assignments are submitted late, your grade will be reduced by five points per each late assignment.

Article Summaries

The object of this assignment is for you to synthesize information from articles that you will read and from articles that will be presented to you by group-mates. You will compose two summaries.

The first summary will describe the different disabilities under IDEA.

The second summary will describe specific language intervention models.



Each summary should refer to specific information from specific articles, so take good notes during the jigsaw groups.

Each summary should be no more than three pages long, double spaced.

Language Sample Analysis

The object of this assignment is for you to start analyzing children’s language utterances and to determine where a child falls within the language continuum.

You will present a summary of your child’s language stage including specific examples to support your findings. Refer to the reading “Children’s Early Linguistic Learning” as guide for your analysis.

The language sample analysis should be no more than two pages long.

Attach your language sample transcript to the analysis.

Literacy Lesson Plan

The object of this assignment is for you to incorporate what you have learned about language development and language intervention into your teaching.

The lesson should include your goal and objectives, procedure and evaluation method. Please indicate the age group the lesson is geared to.

The procedure will be the core of your lesson. You should provide a detailed, step-by- step explanation. Include any questions you might ask your students or the rationale for any activity.

Language and literacy objectives must be included.

The lesson plan should be no more than two pages long.



EDLIT 739.02: Special Needs Issues in Literacies Within the Disciplines

Co-requisite: EDLIT 734 Literacies within the Disciplines

COURSE DESCRIPTIONS:A. Brief Description: Adaptation, modification and management of instruction,

curriculum, the learning environment, and materials across the curriculum for children with special learning needs. The internship in the co-requisite, “Literacy within the Disciplines,” will provide opportunity for students to gain expanded understanding and strategies to develop an inclusive classroom.

B. Expanded Description: This course offers the teacher candidate an understanding of expanded skills and knowledge in aspects of literacy that all children need, and will focus on how to make those skills and knowledge bases across academic subject areas accessible to students with disabilities. The critical nature of skills in studying, time management, and organization will be included. Finally, the teacher-candidate will be expected to understand and acquire skills in consultation and collaboration that will enable the teamwork necessary among the members of a multidisciplinary staff to support children with disabilities in inclusive settings.

C. Writing Requirements: Writing requirements will include:a. A 3-4 page paper, evaluating two kinds of instructional materials, one in

mathematics and one in science, identifying one disabled child in the internship setting for whom these materials would be appropriate.

b. Written adaptation of a subject area test so that it is an appropriate testing accommodation for a disabled child in the internship setting.

c. Written lesson of 2-4 pages teaching how to learn material from text by note taking for a small group of students in the internship, including one or more children with special needs.

RATIONALE:This course is required within the Master in Literacy (Birth to Grade 6) professional Certificate program. It meets the requirements to prepare teachers to work with students with special education needs, as outlined in the New York State Education Department regulations (New Standards for Programs Preparing Classroom Teachers, 1999, Albany, NY: State Department of Education).

Course ObjectivesKnowledge: The Teacher-Candidate will: Discuss the strategies that students with disabilities will need to gain literacy in

subject area learning. Explain the adaptations, modifications, and accommodations that will enhance the

child’s ability to gain literacy mastery across the curriculum. (IRA Standard 12.1)Skills: The Teacher-Candidate will: Present a user-friendly lecture, accommodating children with diverse learning

Syllabi EDLIT 739.02: Special Needs Issues75


needs, styles, and interests. (IRA Standard 12.2) Critique a learning environment, suggesting ways to adapt design, materials,

teaching strategies, and use (or non-use) of technology to encourage literacy to gain subject area knowledge.

Dispositions: The teacher candidate will be able to : Demonstrate an understanding of the behaviors that can overcome barriers to

collaboration, consultation, and teamwork in providing optimal learning environments for children with special learning needs..

Course ContentI. Literacy Process for Content (3 hours)

i. Selecting Concepts and Related Vocabularyii. Evaluating Instructional Materials

iii. Assessing Students’ Prior Knowledgeiv. Using Pre-learning Activitiesv. Reinforcing Learning

II. Adaptation and management of Curriculum and Instructional Materials (3 hours)

Adapting textbooks Developing Listener-Friendly Lessons Constructing and Adapting Tests Management issues in inclusive classrooms

III. Study Skills and Learning Strategies (3 hours) Personal Development Skills

A. Time management and SchedulingB. Self-Monitoring and ReinforcementC. Notebook OrganizationD. Classroom Organization

IV. Process Skills and Expression Skills (3 hours) Listening and note-taking Learning from Text Remembering Information Study Skills Test-Taking Skills

VI. Consultation and Collaboration (3 hours) Rationale: How is teamwork critical to successful inclusion? Who is involved in consultation and collaboration? What are the challenges to staff, students, families, and administrators? How to collaborate: Issues and dilemmas Co-teaching

Course Organization and Supporting Information



This fifteen-hour course will be conducted in five sessions of three hours each. The course will include discussion, lecture, and demonstrations of modifications and adaptations of instructional materials to meet the needs of disabled children. In addition, students will present a brief, “user-friendly” lecture. There will be several written assignments, all related to expanding literacy across the disciplines for children with special needs. Students will be taking an internship required in the co-requisite course, “Literacy within the Disciplines,” and will use this experience for assignments in this course, as well.

Required Readings:Bos, C.S. & Vaughn, S. (1998) Strategies for teaching students with learning and

behavior problems. (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon

Recommended Readings:Dettmer, P.A., Dyck, N.T., & Thurston, L.P. (1999). Consultation, Collaboration, and

Teamwork for Students with Special Needs (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Falvey, M.A. (1995). Inclusive and heterogeneous schooling: Assessment, curriculum,

and instruction. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.Friend, M. & Bursuck, W. (1999.) Including students with special needs: A practical

guide for classroom teachers. (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Gunning, T.G. (2000). Creating literacy instruction for all children. (3rd ed.) Boston:

Allyn & Bacon.Hammeken, P.A. (1997). 450 strategies for success: A practical guide for all educators

who teach students with disabilities. Minnetonka, MN: Peytral Publications.Musselwhite, C. & Kind-DeBaum, P. (1998). Emergent Literacy Success: Merging

Whole Language and Technology. Park City, UT: Southeast Augmentative Communication.Ryndak, D.L. & Alper, S. (1996). Curriculum content for students with moderate and

severe disabilities in inclusive settings. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Methods of Evaluation: Write a 3-4 page paper evaluating two kinds of instructional materials used in the internship

classroom, one in mathematics and one in science. Considering the needs of one disabled child in the internship setting, describe why these materials would be appropriate for the child’s learning; also consider ways in which adaptation or modification would be better, and prepare these modifications. (30% of grade).

Using an examination in social studies, the arts, or language arts, prepared by the teacher in the internship classroom, prepare a written adaptation of the exam with a particular child with special needs in mind. Explain each of your changes, and why you believe this adaptation would enable the child to demonstrate mastery of knowledge and skills better in your modified examination. (30% of grade.)

Prepare a 2-4 page written lesson plan you would use for a designated small group in your internship to teach how to learn by taking notes in a subject area from a textbook. Include any instrument or method you design to assess prior knowledge, and to evaluate the learning of the students. (30% of grade)

Prepare a “user-friendly” lecture of 5 minutes duration for demonstration in your college classroom. Provide fellow students with any advance organizers, or other tools which will support your lecture. Received critique from peers at the end of the lecture. (10% of grade.)



EDLIT 739.03: Adaptations and Modifications in Approaches to Literacy for Students with Special Needs

Co-requisite: EDLIT 735 Instructional Approaches to Literacy: K through grade 6.

COURSE DESCRIPTIONS:

Brief Description: Adaptation and modification of instructional strategies, technology and curriculum in literacy for full inclusion of children with disabilities. Corequisite practica in EDLIT 735 focusing on curriculum adaptation, this course targets children with special learning needs.

Expanded Description: This course offers the teacher candidate the knowledge and skills needed to create an elementary grade environment to enhance the language and literacy of children with disabilities in inclusive settings. In addition to legal and policy considerations, the student will expand the teaching repertoire to include appropriate strategies to adapt and modify curriculum and instruction, to use specialized strategies for particular children, and to employ assistive, augmentative, and educational technology to accommodate effectively all children in a classroom to acquire and expand literacy skills mastery. The focus of the course is across all disabilities for children in Kindergarten through 6.

Writing Requirements: Student will maintain a journal of their internship experience in which they will select

one child with a special need in literacy education. They will observe and record the teaching/learning strategies used in one activity for each session, what worked and what did not; they will hypothesize why some interventions were effective and some not.

Student will be required to adapt a standard reading passage to accommodate the needs of two children with two different disabilities. The student will briefly write why the modifications are appropriate for the particular child cited.

Student will required to visit 2 websites related to literacy and to write a one page review of each.

RATIONALE:This course is required within the Master in Literacy (Birth to Grade 6) professional Certificate program. It meets the requirements to prepare teachers to work with students with special education needs, as outlined in the New York State Education Department regulations (New Standards for Programs Preparing Classroom Teachers, 1999, Albany, NY: State Department of Education).

Course ObjectivesKnowledge: The teacher candidate will:

Syllabi EDLIT 739.03: Adaptions78


Describe the history, policy, and laws that provide children with disabilities the right to appropriate education in the least restrictive environment.

Explain the I.E.P. process, and the implications of this process in the inclusive classroom. (IRA Standard 12.7)

Identify characteristics of children with diverse learning needs and recognize the influence those characteristics have on developing literacy competence.

Skills: The teacher candidate will: Utilize a broad repertoire of strategies to accommodate the unique needs of

disabled students in expanding specific literacy skills. (IRA Standard 12.2) Adapt and modify literacy curriculum to meet special learning needs of

children with disabilities. (IRA Standard 12.2) Analyze and evaluate literacy curriculum from the perspective of its

appropriateness for children with special learning needs. (IRA Standard 12.1)Dispositions: The teacher candidate will:

Demonstrate an appreciation for the use of adaptive, assistive, and educational technology to benefit literacy acquisition for children with special needs.

Course Content (5 sessions, 3 hours each)I. History, Policy, and the Law for Children with Disabilities

(3 hours)a. Mainstreaming and Inclusion: The I.D.E.A.b. The Individualized Educational Programc. The Teaching-Learning Process in Special Educationd. Assessment and Evaluation Issuese. The Technology Act

II. Children with High Incidence Disabilities: Adapting and Modifying Literacy Curriculum, Instruction, and Materials for Children with Learning Disabilities, Behavior Disorders, and Communication Disorders

(6 hours)a. “The Model of Unique Instruction” vs. Whole Language Processb. Assessing Aspects of Literacy Curriculum for special needs children c. From Assessment to Planningd. Oral Languagee. Reading Instructionf. Writing Instruction: The Writing Workshop

III. Children with Low Incidence Disabilities: Adapting and Modifying Literacy Curriculum, Instruction, and Materials (3 hours)

a. Literacy and Children with Vision and/or Hearing Disabilities b. Literacy and Children with Physical Disabilities

c. Literacy and Children with Chronic Health Issuesd. Literacy and Children with Significant Multiple Disabilitiese. Literacy and Children with Autism

IV. Considerations with all Children with Disabilities in Inclusive Settings(3 hours)



a. Socializationb. Classroom Managementc. Parent Involvement d. Family Literacye. Literacy, Disability, and Technology

Course Organization and Supporting InformationThis fifteen-hour course will be conducted in five sessions of three hours each. The course will include discussion, lecture, and demonstration of adapted strategies. Students will be completing an internship for the co-requisite course, “Instructional Approaches to Literacy,” and will have opportunities in those settings to observe children with special needs alongside a general education population. Required Readings:

Bos, C.S. & Vaughn, S., (1998). Strategies for teaching students with learning and behavior problems. (4th ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. (Chapters 1-6).

Rhodes, L.K. and Dudley-Marling, C. (1996). Readers and Writers with a Difference: A Holistic Approach to Teaching Struggling Readers and Writers (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. (Selected chapters).Recommended Readings:

Dettmer, P.A., Dyck, N.T., & Thurston, L.P. (1999). Consultation, Collaboration, and Teamwork for Students with Special Needs (3rd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Elkind, D. (1998). Children with special needs: A postmodern perspective. Journal of Education, 180, (2), 1-16.

Hammeken, P.A. (1997). 450 strategies for success: A practical guide for all educators who teach students with disabilities. Minnetonka, MN: Peytral Publications.

Rutkowski, K. (1998). Expanding the learning horizons of special needs students. Multimedia Schools, 5 , (5), 76-81.

Soderman, A.K., Gregory, K.M., & O’Neill, L.T. (1999). Scaffolding emergent literacy: A child-centered approach for preschool through grade 5. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Walther-Thomas, C., Korinek, L., McLaughlin, V.L. & Williams, B.T. (2000). Collaboration for inclusive education: Developing successful programs. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Websites: Instructional Resources for Students with Special Needs (Addendum A)

Methods of Evaluation: Reflective journal focused on one child with a disability in one aspect of his/her literacy

acquisition. Consider the child’s reaction to standard instruction, any adapted or modified strategies or materials attempted, and any individualized assistance provided over time. Reflect on the child’s response to different curriculum materials. (30% of the grade)

Report of the modification/adaptation of a selected reading material (children's book or basal excerpt) to meet the special needs of two different children in the class. (30% of the grade)

Analysis of the literacy curriculum of a particular classroom from the perspective of its appropriateness for children with special learning needs. (30% of the grade)

One page review of two web sites listed in the Recommended Reading list from the perspective of their usefulness as a resource for teachers, children with special needs, and the parents of children with disabilities. (10% of the grade)



EDLIT 740 Leadership in Literacy Prerequisites: A minimum of 27 credits in the Masters in Literacy Program

Course Description:Brief Description: Culminating experience in planning, assessing, and developing literacy and staff development programs that utilizes understandings gained throughout the Masters in Literacy program. Fundamentals of leadership are explored in the context of communication, supervision, and support of literacy programs.

Expanded Description: Teacher candidates will explore the components of quality programs for literacy learning and staff development. Principles of leadership will address communication, building consensus and team building for professional growth. The culminating experience project will focus on program design, conducting needs assessments, selecting appropriate research methodologies to evaluate program implementation, and consideration of the full range of factors that impact program planning. The culminating project will be adapted for professional presentation, publication, or grant submission.

Writing Requirements: Teacher candidates will complete five two-page reflective essays in class in response to course content, discussion, or readings. A culminating project of approximately thirty pages will be submitted that consists of three parts: needs assessment, program design, and research plan for evaluation of program implementation. Teacher candidates will choose to adapt their project for presentation, publication, or grant submission.

Rationale:This course is a required course within the masters in Literacy (Birth to Grade 6) professional certificate program. According to New York State regulation this certificate program must include: ...proficiency in organizing and enhancing literacy programs, including but not limited to: communicating information about literacy to various groups ...” (pp. 59-60 of New Standards for Programs Preparing Classroom Teachers, 1999, Albany, NY: State Department of Education).

Course ObjectivesKnowledge: The teacher candidate will

Explain the relationships among goals, needs, content, and methodology in program evaluation.

Skills: The teacher candidate will: Prepare and evaluate professional development programs that address strengths and needs.

(IRA Standard 13.2) Develop a staff development plan considering all the components necessary in program

planning: needs assessment, resources, supervision and evaluation. (IRA Standards 13.1, 13.3, 13.4, and 13.5)

Propose a research study that takes into account a range of methodologies and that meets specific classroom- and teacher-based priorities. (IRA Standards 14.2 and 14.3)

Dispositions: The teacher candidate will: Demonstrate a willingness to make presentations at literacy meetings and conferences. (IRA

Standard 16.5) Demonstrate an appreciation for one's role in researching and writing for publication to enrich

one's understanding and growth in the profession. (IRA Standards 16.7 and 16.8) Demonstrate an appreciation for one’s role in advocating for the profession. (IRA Standard

16.4)

Content Outline: (One class meeting per topic with flexibility to adapt to student needs, unless otherwise indicated)

Components of quality programs (2 sessions)In literacy--Standards

Syllabi EDLIT 740: Leadership81


For staff development--StandardsIdentifying needs and evaluating programs (3 sessions)

Conducting a needs assessmentMultiple factors in and selection of research methodologies

Collaboration (1 session)Collaboration with colleagues

Components of planning and implementing programs (4 sessions)Obtaining buy-inResources (financial, environmental and human)Follow-up for implementationGoal settingSupervisionEvaluation

Communication (3 sessions) Mentoring and supporting paraprofessionalsCommunicating about literacy to constituencies within the school community Presenting and publishing for professional organizations

Course Organization and Supporting Information: Lecture, reflection, investigation, discussion and debate of research, theories and issues in literacy program evaluation and design. Required Readings:

King, J. A., Morris, L. L., Fitz-Gibbon, C. T. (1987). How to assess program implementation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Fullan, M. (1993). Change forces: Probing the depths of educational reform. New York, NY: Falmer Press.

Robinson, R. D., McKenna, M. C., & Wedman, J. M. (2000). Issues and Trends in Literacy Education. New York, NY: Allyn and Bacon.

Recommended Readings: Donohue, Z., Van Tassell, M. A., & Patterson, L. (Eds.) (1996). Research in the classroom: Talk, texts,

and inquiry. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.Fitz-Gibbon, C. T., & Morris, L. L. (1987). How to design a program evaluation. Newbury Park, CA:

Sage Publications.

Methods of evaluation:25% 5 Reflective essays (in-class) that focus on professional advocacy issues, discussions, and challenges

addressed in coursework and readings.75% Culminating experience project that contains three stages of project development:

1) Planning and conducting a needs assessment of literacy or staff development programs2) Designing a literacy program or staff development plan that addresses the strengths and

weaknesses identified in the needs assessment3) Proposing a research study that meets school and teacher needs and priorities.4) Teacher candidates will choose to adapt their culminating project for submission to a

professional journal, presentation at a professional conference, or submit their proposal to a grant making agency or organization.

Syllabi EDLIT 740: Leadership82


EDLIT 742 Practicum in Literacy Prerequisites: 15 to 18 credit hours in the Literacy Masters program

Course Descriptions:Brief Description: 15 hour seminar and 50 hour college supervised practium divided into two 25 hour placements; one at early childhood and one at the childhood level.Writing Requirements: A journal and two three-page reflective essays will be required.

Rationale:In the Masters in Literacy Program teacher candidates are required to have a total of 50 hours of supervised practicum in literacy at the early childhood and childhood levels in order to fulfill New York State teacher education regulations. This one-credit practicum meets that state regulation.

Course Objectives Knowledge:

Demonstrate understanding of the interrelation of reading, writing, listening and speaking in literacy instruction

Demonstrate understanding that students need opportunities ot integrate their use of literacy though reading, writing, listening, speaking, viewing, and representing visually.

Recognize the importance of giving learners opportunities in all aspects of literacy Skills:

Create a literate environment that fosters interest and growth in all aspects of literacy through direct instruction and teaching classic and contemporary children’s literature. (IRA Standards 2.12)

Model and discuss reading and writing as valuable, lifelong activities (IRA Standard 5.3) Provide opportunities for learners to select from a variety of written materials, to read extended texts,

and to read for many authentic purposes Use instructional and information technologies to provide skillful instruction in literacy learning in key

areas of comprehension: metacognition, questioning, variable reading rate, prior knowledge and strategies. (IRA Standards 2.8, 7.1, 7.3, 7.4, and 8.2)

Dispositions: Demonstrate a willingness to interact with teachers, teacher educators and other allied professionals in

assessing student achievement and planning instruction (IRA Standard 16.3) Demonstrate a willingness to reflect upon one’s practices in professional terms. (IRA Standard 16.2).

Content Outline: (One class meeting per topic with flexibility to adapt to student needs, unless otherwise indicated) Literature in Literacy learning Direct Instruction: When and How explicit? Meeting student needs in Comprehension by experiences and instruction in:

metacognition questioning varying their reading rate using prior knowledge employing strategies for self-monitoring and making meaning from text

Organizing for literacy instruction Lesson clarity Instructional variety Task orientation Student engagement Measuring success Higher order thinking Meeting Performance Standards

Syllabi EDLIT 742: Practicum83


Course Organization and Supporting Information: Reflection, discussion and observation of literacy instructional practices and interactions at two developmental levels.Required Readings:

Borich, G. D. (1999). Observation Skills for Effective Teaching (3rd ed.) Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Recommended Readings: Varied current readings relevant to seminar topics, assigned by the instructor.

Methods of evaluation:10% Reflective weekly logs that focus on issues, discussions, and challenges addressed in practicum

experiences and seminar discussions.10% Daily journal of instructional decisions, plans, experiences and the bases for instruction decision

making50% Formal observation evaluations in the field by the supervising professor 30% Self-reflection video of teaching must demonstrate two of the folowing:

Your use of questioningYour integration of metacognitionYour instruction of strategies for making meaning from textYour activation of students’ prior knowledge, and/orYour instruction or modeling of variability in reading rate.

Syllabi EDLIT 742: Practicum84


Transition Plan to Performance-based Assessmentof Candidate Competencies in the Masters in Literacy Program

The literacy program coordinator is responsible for planning, piloting, collecting, and evaluating data with the input and assistance, as needed, of the Masters in Literacy faculty. As needed the program coordinator will call upon faculty to summarize and analyze the data from their own courses. Summarization and analysis of data from admission, portfolio review, formative and summative program evaluations will be done by the program coordinator or his/her designee (as in the case of the independently conducted focus group interviews) at the conclusion of each academic year. Information in the form of a yearly report will be shared with the Dean of the School of Education and the Masters in Literacy faculty at the beginning of the new academic year. Course data will be collected on a semester basis in all courses that are offered during a given semester. A form for the aggregation, synthesis and analysis of course data by faculty is included in Appendix B. On the following chart, TC means Teacher Candidate. “Student(s)” refers to birth through grade 6 learner(s) of the teacher candidates.Candidate Competencies:

2001-2002Planning phase and Implementation of the new program

2002-2003Pilot, revision and aggregation phase

2003-2004Continuation of revision and synthesize data phase

2004-2005: Full implementation. Focal questions to be addressed to the data

Content Knowledge

(as evidenced in attainment of competency levels within IRA standards)

Plan evidence collection and methods of evaluation in each course

Pilot evaluations, rubrics and collect benchmark examples

Design follow-up evaluations with skills evaluations

How do levels of attainment correlate to T. C. evaluations of program? Is there a relationship among impact on student learning, skills, and dispositions with levels of attainment in content knowledge?

Pedagogical Knowledge To utilize

multiple assessments (of students, TC’s, and programs

Design and implement student assessments using case studies

Plan and implement TC and Program assessmentsRefine rubrics of student assessments

Aggregate data, Select benchmarksRevise rubrics/criteria

Is TC facility with assessment utilized at multiple levels?Does assessment skill result in improved student outcomes and supervisor evaluations?

To transform one’s knowledge into active practices

Plan practicum and video reflection in courses.

Devise practicum and video criteria and rubrics for evaluation

Pilot practicum, revise and select benchmarks examples

Is TC attainment in knowledge areas predictive of skill levels? In not, what is? If so, in what ways?

Pedagogical Skills To teach

creatively and with ZEST

Design aesthetics integration

Identify first cohort, pilot and revise rubrics

Aggregate data and implement with second cohort

What is the relationship between evidence of ZEST in teaching and student learning?

To improve one’s skills

Plan practicum and portfolio collections

Pilot portfolios at 18-20 credit transition point

Pilot practicumRevise rubrics, Select benchmarks,Coordinate video with NBPTS

What % of TC’s go for NBPTS certification?What skills are most and least improved and to what degree?

Professional Skills To construct

knowledgeBuild courses and plan evidence collection

Create rubrics and criteria for teacher inquiry/research

Revise criteria, rubrics, and create opportunities for dissemination

How many TC’s present at conferences and/or submit papers for publication?

Appendix A Transition and Assessment Plans 85


To develop/ adapt curriculum

Plan practicum and portfolio collections

Pilot portfolios at 18-20 credit transition point

Pilot practicumRevise rubrics, Select benchmarks,Coordinate video with NBPTS

In what ways are TC’s adapting curriculum? At what levels? For whom? To what effect?

Dispositions To collaborate

and reflectBegin portfolio design, guidelines.Design culminating project

Pilot portfolio and culminating projects, refine rubrics, guidelines, and plan follow-up survey

Pilot initial follow-up surveys and questionnaires

Does a high level of TC professionalism, collaboration and reflection result in career advances, improved student learning, and leadership roles?

Commitment to urban education

Tie conceptual framework to literacy program outcomes in the portfolio

Design follow-up questionnaires, pilot portfolio, revise

Pilot follow-up questionnaires, select benchmarks, revise rubrics

Have TC’s been retained in urban schools? What is their level of supervisor evaluation compared to other teachers who are not program graduates?

To work toward equity

Plan portfolio evidence and course expectations

Pilot portfolio, revise rubrics, aggregate

Revise as neededSelect benchmarks, initiate follow-up surveys

What accommodations are TC’s making at the class level? At the school level? At the program level? Do any of these result in improved student outcomes for students at-promise?

To make a difference (social justice)

Tie conceptual framework to literacy program outcomes and course expectations

Pilot portfolio, revise rubrics and plan follow-up surveys

Revise, as needed, Pilot follow-up surveys and select benchmarks

In what ways and how many TC’s are taking on active roles in promoting social justice after graduation? Can this be tracked back to program experiences?

Impact on student learning

What is the most valid and reliable program measure of the impact on student learning? How does it relate to program and career success?

1. In the professional teaching portfolio

Design portfolio evaluation guidelines

Design rubrics for the evaluation of student learning and pilot at 18-20 credit transition point

Select benchmarks Revise, Aggregate and pilot continuation

Is this the most valid and reliable program measure of the impact on student learning? How does it relate to program and career success?

2. In case studies in clinical courses

Pilot case studies in language and assessment

Revise and pilot case studies in clinical sequence

ReviseSelect benchmarks


3. In video or other evidence during the teaching practicum

Plan practicum Design evaluation rubrics and criteriaPilot practicum

Revise, Select video benchmarks


Overall Program1. Admissions Develop program

databasePilot admission review forms

Synthesize data from 2001 to present

Revise admissions criteria as needed and database

What is the relationship between admission “strength” of TC and program success?

2. Formative focus groups

Pilot focus group Revise as needed Aggregate data

Synthesize data to date

In what ways is the program strong? Weak? Useful? Irrelevant? What



Discuss program changes

Initiate program changes

needs to change?

3. Formative program evaluations

Pilot at the 12 credit point

ReviseAggregate data Discuss program changes

Continued piloting of questionnaires at key program pointsInitiate program changes

In what ways is the program strong? Weak? Useful? Irrelevant? What needs to change?

4. Summative program evaluations

Plan for end program evaluations

Design end of program evaluations

Pilot and reviseDiscuss changes


5. Graduate tracking system

Plan for graduate tracking

Design grad tracking system on a database

Pilot and refineAggregate data to date

What are the ways in which the program impacts graduates at various points in their careers? Do program graduates stay in the field? Do they take on leadership roles? Do they leave the classroom? Do they pursue higher degrees?

6. Summative surveys and interviews of grads and employers

Plan for summative program surveys

Design grad and employer interviews and surveys

Pilot and refineAggregate and synthesize data to date




Assessment Plan for the Masters in Literacy ProgramThe assessment plan for the Masters in Literacy Program is outlined below and includes: assessment of teacher candidate competencies at key transition points of,

admission, pre-clinical experiences, post-clinical experiences, and exit from the program,

formative program evaluations, and summative program evaluations. This narrative introduction to the assessment plan is followed by an appendix that includes assessment plan related forms, rubrics, database samples, and a draft of the portfolio guidelines (currently in development).

Assessment and Evaluation of Teacher Candidate Competencies:

At admission into the program, teacher candidates must have attained or presented: Grade Point Average (GPA) of a minimum of 2.8 in undergraduate work Acceptable recommendation of a supervisor Satisfactory completion of an on-site writing sample, judged by at least two

independent readers with a rubric (attached). Preliminary certification in New York State which requires passing scores on New

York State Teacher Certification Examinations.When applications for admission are received in the admissions department of Hunter College, they are screened for completeness. At that time the admissions department advises candidates of missing components and invites them to complete their applications prior to further consideration. Within a week following the application deadline, the Literacy Program Coordinator screens completed applications for minimal requirements for admission to the Masters in Literacy program. Candidates who do not meet minimal requirements are informed by the admissions department of the rejection of their applications to the Literacy Program. Candidates who meet minimal requirements are then invited to submit an on-site writing sample. On-site writing samples are administered by the Office of Educational Services in the School of Education. A committee consisting of the program coordinator and two other members of the Masters in Literacy faculty judge the writing samples according to the rubric included in Appendix B and review the complete applications. Admission Review Forms (sample included in Appendix B) document the committee’s decisions. Admission to the Masters in Literacy program is extremely competitive. Final decisions are made by consensus of the reviewing faculty.

At conclusion of 12 credits (foundational coursework in the program), teacher candidates must have attained or presented:

Grade Point Average (GPA) of a minimum of 3.0 on all courses taken in the Literacy Masters Program

Masters candidates with any course grades below B- will be counseled and placed on probation or will not be allowed to continue in the program.

Masters candidates with a grade of incomplete in any course will be restricted from registering for more than one course.



Masters candidates with two or more grades of incomplete are prohibited from registering for any more courses.

The program coordinator reviews all the grades of all teacher candidates at the 12 credit transition point. A list of teacher candidates with course grades below B- or with incomplete grades is compiled and a committee of literacy faculty meet to discuss each candidate. Following faculty discussion, these teacher candidates are invited to speak to the program coordinator about their grades and their commitment to continue in the Literacy Masters program. Teacher candidates may be counseled to transfer to another Masters Program or they may continue in the program on probation. If they choose to continue on probation, they sign a letter of intent to continue in the program (included in appendix B). Teacher candidates with incomplete grade(s) must complete a “contract” with their professor(s), included in Appendix B. Probationary status requires that the teacher candidate maintain grades above a B- during the next semester and report, with their grades, to the program coordinator at the conclusion of each semester until pre-clinical coursework is completed. The literacy program database is utilized to obtain a list of teacher candidates at the 12 credit transition point. The QUEST student information system of Hunter College is utilized to check teacher candidate grades and cumulative GPA. Samples of student information maintained in both the QUEST and Literacy program databases are included in Appendix B.

At the conclusion of 18-20 credits (pre-clinical transition point within the program), teacher candidates must have attained or presented;

Grade Point Average (GPA) of a minimum of 3.0 on all courses taken in the Literacy Masters Program

Masters candidates with any course grades below B- will be counseled and placed on probation or will not be allowed to continue in the program.



An adequate rating or better during presentation of the Professional Teaching Portfolio to the Masters in Literacy Portfolio Review Committee.

The foundation of the assessment of teacher candidate competencies, outside of coursework, is the development and presentation of a professional teaching portfolio. Although items for possible inclusion in the portfolio may be collected within the course of study as course assignments and evaluations, teacher candidates are allowed to choose the products that they believe best demonstrate their attainment of the competencies within the Masters program. In addition to selecting items for presentation, teacher candidates are required to reflect upon each item and its impact upon their teaching. To that end, the teacher candidates provide a reflective context statement for each product and include evidence of the impact upon their students’ learning in the form of work samples, test scores or other evidence. Although the guidelines for the Professional Teaching Portfolio are currently in development, a draft version of the guidelines is included in Appendix B. Draft guidelines include the rubrics for evaluation by the Literacy Portfolio Review Committee as well as the competency areas for portfolio development that include the standards for reading professionals as well as the assessment areas within the conceptual framework of the Hunter College School of Education. Candidates who do not obtain an adequate rating will be given feedback and allowed to resubmit their portfolio within a



two weeks from initial review. If the candidate still does not obtain an adequate rating on the portfolio, the candidate will be counseled by the program coordinator and will be allowed to withdraw from the program or transfer to another program within the School of Education.

At the conclusion of 27-30 credits within the program, teacher candidates must have attained or presented:

Completion of practicum, EDLIT 742, with a grade of B or better. Students who obtain a grade of B- must retake EDLIT 742: students will only be allowed to retake the practicum once. Grade Point Average (GPA) of a minimum of 3.0 on all courses taken in the Literacy Masters Program

Masters candidates with any course grades below B- will not be allowed to continue in the program.



An adequate rating or better during presentation of the Professional Teaching Portfolio to the Masters in Literacy Portfolio Review Committee.

At exit, teacher candidates must have attained or presented: Grade Point Average (GPA) of a minimum of 3.0 on all courses taken in the Literacy

Masters Program A minimum grade of B on the culminating project. An adequate rating, or better, in the practicum (EDLIT 741) as reflected in a grade of

B or better.

Formative Evaluations of Literacy Program Effectiveness

Formative program evaluations consist of interviews and questionnaires that are confidential. Feedback gained from these interviews and questionnaires are used by the program coordinator to make recommendations regarding: the revision of course content; the refinement of course evaluations and projects; the discussion and incorporation of teacher candidates' suggestions regarding the program; the effectiveness of program policies and procedures; the appropriateness of field sites and practicum experiences; topics for consideration in faculty professional development; and items for discussion during Masters in Literacy program team meetings.

All teacher candidates complete a program assessment questionnaire in class at the 12, 20 and 27 credit points in the program (included in Appendix B).

All literacy program faculty complete a similar questionnaire at the conclusion of each academic year, usually June (included in Appendix B).

Teacher candidate focus group interviews are conducted yearly at the conclusion of the spring semester of each academic year (focus group questionnaire is included in Appendix B). Focus groups are selected and conducted by an independent consumer reaction agency. Final focus group reports are given to the program coordinator. Anonymity of participants is maintained.

Summative Evaluations of Literacy Program Effectiveness



Summative program evaluations consist of tracking graduates as far as possible to determine the career options followed by graduates and conducting follow-up interviews with graduates and their employers. Feedback gained from these interviews and surveys are used by the program coordinator to suggest program changes and extensions; refine course content, evaluations and projects; formulate strategic plans; design faculty development initiatives; and raise issues of concern or acknowledgement for discussion during Masters in Literacy faculty team meetings.

Completion of a program assessment questionnaire at the completion of the final semester of coursework. (To be developed in 2002-2003)

Tracking of program graduates with a survey at one year, three year and five year points after graduation from the program. (To be developed in 2002-2003)

Telephone interviews of randomly selected graduates at the one year, three year, and five year points after graduation. (To be developed in 2002-2003)

Principal or supervisor interviews of program graduates at the one year and three year points after graduation. (To be developed in 2002-2003)



Hunter CollegeMasters in Literacy Program

Admission Review Form

Applicant's name:

Undergraduate Institution:

Undergraduate Major: Undergraduate GPA:(2.8 Desired)

Graduate Institution:

Graduate Major: Graduate GPA(3.0 desired)

Criteria CommentGPA Prerequisite coursework needed or Explanation of low GPA:

Teaching Certificate Held:

None Provisional PermanentSpecialist: State of issuance:

Place of Employment

On-site Writing Sample:

Composition Rating: Competency Rating:

Comments:

Courses taken at Grad level (waivers or exemptions possible)

Course Semester/Year Grade Institution

Recommendation(s): Notable Comments in Recommendations:Mark with

Prerequisite Coursework:Assessment ____ Evidence Provided?

____ Instructor approval needed ____ Instructor approval obtained

Health Education ____ Evidence Provided? ____ Instructor approval needed ____ Instructor approval obtained

Educational Technology

____ Evidence Provided? ____ Instructor approval needed ____ Instructor approval obtained

_____ Accepted _____ Conditional Acceptance _____ Rejected

Rationale or recommendations:

Appendix B Sample Forms 92


Advisor assigned: Reviewer(s) Initials:

Rubrics for Judging AdmissionsOn-site Writing Samples

( adapted from Myers, 1980)On-site writing samples are judged in two areas: (1) composition and (2) competency in English. For composition, readers assign an even number score according to the following descriptions:

8 = The writer identifies the topic, supplies descriptive details and provides a strong basis for his or her argument either through lively anecdote or an insightful discussion. The paper has almost no irrelevant statements and has an easily observable coherence or plan.

6 = The writer give some descriptive detail about the topic and at least one examined reason for his or her argument. The paper has no serious incoherence and little in the way of irrelevant or digressive statements.

4 = The writer merely names the topic and says a bare minimum about his or her reasons for having an opinion about the topic. In some cases the writer may confuse the issue by talking about irrelevant or unrelated matters.

2 = The writer does not seem to have understood what he or she has been asked to do. The paper contains obvious irrelevancies or is so halting and brief that it communicates little information to the reader.

For competency in English, the reader judges the writer's overall skills and assigns a number according to the following broad descriptions:

5 = Outstandingly varied, mature sentences, with strong diction and almost no errors; notable in use of subordination and free of modifiers.

4 = Above-average sentence sense; few errors in usage or punctuation (and none of them major); perhaps some hint of a sense of style.

3 = About average for the papers scored; many short sentences, perhaps with some comma faults and an occasional fragment; but overall, a suggestion that the student has a fair grasp of sentence sense.

2 = A cluster of errors in grammar, usage, and punctuation or a paper which has a dead-level simplicity and monotony of style, practically no sentence without an error of some kind; but in spite of these problems, generally readable.

1 = A paper so badly marred with problems that the reader can hardly follow the ideas presented, either because of stumbling syntax or because of word choices and form problems.



Hunter College Masters in Literacy ProgramAcademic Probation Contract

Name:

Academic Probation Date beginning:

Academic probation will be lifted on the following date, ________________, when the above named teacher candidate accomplishes the following:

Academic Advisor Signature:

Teacher Candidate Signature:



Faculty Data Aggregation Form for course standards

Faculty name: Course title:

Course number: Semester/year:

Number of teacher candidates evaluated: Date submitted:

Standard(s) measured in your course

Method of Evaluation

Manner of evaluation (how did you judge the work)

Teacher candidates below standard

Teacher candidates meeting the standard

Teacher candidates who exceeded the standard

Insights gained that impact the course

Insights gained that impact the program

Please submit to the program coordinator when you submit your grades.



Incomplete Grade Contract



Sample QWST Student Information System: Student Data Page



Sample Literacy Database Design



Culminating Project Evaluation Form

Name: Student ID number:

Title of Project:

Date:

Supervising Professor:

The Culminating project provides evidence of the attainment of the following standards:

Competency Level AttainedThe culminating project: NE IA BC TGT EXYExplains the relationships among goals, needs, content, and methodology in program evaluationPrepares and evaluates professional development programs by addressing programmatic strengths and needs.Develops a staff development plan, based on the program evaluation that utilizes all the components necessary in program planning: needs assessment, resources, supervision and evaluation.Proposes a research study that takes into account a range of methodologies and that meets specific classroom- and teacher-based priorities. Total for each column

NE = Not Evident means that nowhere in the culminating project did the teacher candidate demonstrate this standard, nor could attainment of the standard be implied from the evidence submitted.

IA = Inadequate means the teacher candidate provided evidence with significant gaps in his/her attainment of the standard. The teacher candidate’s culminating project evidence was inconsistent, superficial, limited and/or incomplete.

BC = Basic means that the teacher candidate demonstrated a basic level of competency in attaining the standard. The teacher candidate’s culminating project’s evidence was apparent but not consistent, adequate but not elaborated, connected but not well integrated and may have omitted portions of the report.

TGT = Target means that the teacher candidate demonstrated attainment of the standard. The teacher candidate’s culminating project evidence was consistent, elaborated, and coherent.

EXY = Exemplary means that during the observation the teacher candidate demonstrated exceptional attainment of the standard. The teacher candidate’s culminating project evidence was creative, insightful, and well-integrated.



Practicum Evaluation Form

Name: Student ID number:

Grade Level: School site:

University Supervisor: Date of Observation

Standard addressed Competency Level AttainedNE IA BC TGT EXY

Create a literate environment that fosters interest and growth in all aspects of literacy through direct instruction and teaching classic and contemporary children’s literatureModel and discuss reading and writing as valuable, lifelong activitiesDemonstrate understanding of the interrelation of reading, writing, listening and speaking in literacy instruction

Demonstrate understanding that students need opportunities to integrate their use of literacy though reading, writing, listening, speaking, viewing, and representing visuallyRecognize the importance of giving learners opportunities in all aspects of literacyProvide opportunities for learners to select from a variety of written materials, to read extended texts, and to read for many authentic purposes

Use instructional and information technologies to provide skillful instruction in literacy learning in key areas of comprehension: metacognitionUse instructional and information technologies to provide skillful instruction in literacy learning in key areas of comprehension: questioningUse instructional and information technologies to provide skillful instruction in literacy learning in key areas of comprehension: variable reading rateUse instructional and information technologies to provide skillful instruction in literacy learning in key areas of comprehension: prior knowledgeUse instructional and information technologies to provide skillful instruction in literacy learning in key areas of comprehension: strategiesDemonstrate a willingness to interact with teachers, teacher educators and other allied professionals in assessing student achievement and planning instruction Demonstrate a willingness to reflect upon one’s practices in professional terms Total for each column

NE = Not Evident means that at no time during the observation did the teacher candidate demonstrate this standard, nor could attainment of the standard be implied from the classroom environment over which s/he has responsibility.



IA = Inadequate means during the observation the teacher candidate demonstrated significant gaps in his/her attainment of the standard. The teacher candidate’s demonstration, use or evidence was inconsistent, superficial, and/or limited.

BC = Basic means that during the observation the teacher candidate demonstrated a basic level of competency in the standard. The teacher candidate’s demonstration, use or evidence was apparent but not consistent, adequate but not elaborated, and connected but not well integrated.

TGT = Target means that during the observation the teacher candidate demonstrated attainment of the standard. The teacher candidate’s demonstration, use or evidence was consistent, elaborated, and coherent.

EXY = Exemplary means that during the observation the teacher candidate demonstrated exceptional attainment of the standard. The teacher candidate’s demonstration, use or evidence was pervasive, meaningful, and integrated throughout the curriculum and classroom.

Please attach supporting documentation (observation notes, videos, pictures, samples of student work, etc):



Portfolio Review Form

Name of Teacher Candidate: Id#:

Date submitted: Faculty advisor:

Members of Review committee: Date of Review:

_____ 12 credit Review_____ Pre-clinical Review_____ Post clinical Review_____ Graduation Review

The following rubric will be used to evaluate the Literacy Program Portfolio (McLaughlin & Vogt, 1996; Pearson, 1994).Portfolios are judged in three areas in literacy education:

(1) Knowledge and beliefs about literacy development, (2) Knowledge and application of instruction and assessment, and (3) Knowledge and application of organizing and enhancing a literacy program.

Portfolios are judged in four areas in Teacher Education:1. Pedagogical knowledge2. Pedagogical skills3. Professional skills4. Dispositions

Products and materials included in each of these three areas are judged as demonstrating:(1) Awareness(2) Awareness + explanation(3) Awareness + explanation + application(4) Awareness + explanation + application + flexibility

What evidence of

competency was

presented?

How was an impact

on students’

learning

demonstrated?

What key points

were made in

reflection

statements?

Rating attained for

this section:

Content Knowledge

Knowledge and beliefs about literacy development, Knowledge and

application of

instruction and

assessment,



Knowledge and

application of

organizing and

enhancing a literacy

program

Pedagogical

Knowledge

To utilize

multiple

assessments

To transform

one’s

knowledge into

active practices

Pedagogical Skills

To teach

creatively and

with ZEST

To improve

one’s skills

Professional Skills

To construct

knowledge

To develop/

adapt

curriculum

Dispositions

To collaborate

and reflect

Commitment to

urban education

To work toward

equity

To make a

difference

(social justice)

Masters in Literacy Program



Professional Teaching Portfolio Guidelines

A significant requirement of the Masters in Literacy Program is the development of a professional teaching portfolio to demonstrate competence in Masters in Literacy Program and IRA standards for Reading Professionals. An orientation for new students, including an overview of the professional teaching portfolio, will be conducted each semester to provide guidelines and other information regarding the Masters in Literacy Program and this required project. The purpose of this portfolio is to provide masters candidates with the opportunity to develop a professional document that demonstrates mastery of the Standards for Reading Professionals in the Masters in Literacy Program and fulfills requirements for graduation from the Hunter College School of Education.

What is a professional teaching portfolio?

The portfolio is a collection of a teacher candidate's work, and reflection upon that work, that demonstrates his/her attainment of competency in IRA Standards for Reading Professionals, the Masters in Literacy Program, and the key competencies identified by the Hunter College School of Education.

Who must complete the portfolio?

Every teacher candidate in the Masters in Literacy Program must complete the portfolio prior to graduation from the program.

When and how will the portfolio be evaluated?

Teacher candidates will present their portfolios to the Masters in Literacy faculty at three transition points in the Masters in Literacy Program:

At the completion of 18 to 20 credits in the program, At the completion of 27 to 30 credits in the program, and At exit from the program.

The following rubric will be used to evaluate the Literacy Program Portfolio (Mclaughlin & Vogt, 1996; Pearson, 1994).Portfolios are judged in three areas:

(4) Knowledge and beliefs about literacy development, (5) Knowledge and application of instruction and assessment, and (6) Knowledge and application of organizing and enhancing a literacy program.

Products and materials included in each of these three areas are judged as demonstrating:(5) Awareness(6) Awareness + explanation(7) Awareness + explanation + application(8) Awareness + explanation + application + flexibility

The first area of knowledge and beliefs about literacy development is begun after 12 hours of coursework in the literacy masters program and contains products and materials from coursework in Emergent Literacy (ECC704.FW and EDLIT 739.01), Language and Literacy



(EDLIT 730), and Children's literature (EDLIT 732). This portion of the portfolio is not presented until the 18-20 credit transition point. The second area of knowledge and application of instruction and assessment is begun at the 18-20 credit transition point in the program and is presented at that time. It contains products and materials from coursework in Assessment (EDLIT 731), Writing (EDLIT 733), Instructional Approaches (EDLIT 735 and EDLIT 739.02), and Literacy within the Disciplines (EDLIT 734 and EDLIT 739.03). The third area of knowledge and application of organizing and enhancing a literacy program is submitted upon completion of 27-30 credits within the program and contains products and materials based on coursework in Diagnosis (EDLIT 736), Remediation (EDLIT 737), and Organizing for Literacy (EDLIT 739). Evidence from the practicum (EDLIT 741) and your culminating project in Leadership in Literacy (EDLIT 740) are completed separately and not submitted for review in the portfolio but may be included, if desired.

The overall portfolio is given a holistic rating, based on the following: Exceptional: highly imaginative; demonstrates critical thought; unique; substantial

application to own teaching; goes above and beyond requirements; creative; demonstrates both breadth and depth; shows individual's personality' professional in presentation and appearance; demonstrates considerable effort.

Thorough: well organized and complete; effectively and clearly presented; demonstrates clear understandings; applies what has been learned to the classroom; clearly shows connections; detailed; thoughtful and supported with ideas.

Adequate: meets minimum requirements; includes general information but lacks descriptive details; some application to teaching; lacks originality.

Inadequate: missing evidence or information; sloppy and poorly organized; demonstrates only surface understandings; no evidence of application to teaching; poorly written or does not include rationale statement.

Materials to purchase

a. 4-5 inch 3 ring binder b. 25-50 plastic document sleeves (lightest weight; make sure has full

8 1/2-x 11in. Pocket with a separate strip that has 3-hole punch)c. Tabsd. *optional divider sheets (make sure they are extra width variety)e. Video cassette for use in taping a lesson

Format

The professional portfolio will consist of a number of sections that address the professional standards that you have met (the standards to be met in each of your courses is attached in Appendix A). In addition you will create a section that demonstrates the impact of your attainment of these standards upon your student's learning. Finally, you will create a reflective overview for each section that demonstrates a thoughtful consideration of your learning and your developing expertise as a reading professional.



As you write and type your portfolio and reflection pages, remember there are no abbreviations in a professional document, no typos, whiteouts, erasures, or typeovers. References should follow APA style and format.

Documentation

Documentation means samples of your work to provide evidence of your attainment of the competencies within the Masters in Literacy program and School of Education. As the collection of documentation requires considerable time and will be related to each course you take in the Masters in Literacy Program, this stage will actually be the first step you will undertake. Start from day one, course one, to keep what you feel are the best representations of your skills and/or work. You will put the original graded materials in your portfolio. Prior to presenting your portfolio at the completion of 12 credits in the Masters in Literacy Course of Study, you should organize your materials in terms of the standards met, collect samples of student work or other evidence to demonstrate your impact upon the learning of your students, and take some time to reflect upon the evidence you have collected and your coursework up to that point. The personal reflection should accompany each separate section of your portfolio.

Cassette tapes of child language, videos of your teaching, photographs and any other evidence that is not presentable in a binder should be clearly labeled with your name, date and the appropriate section. Attach these to the portfolio in a ziplock plastic pocket.

Steps to follow

a.) Following announcement of newly admitted candidates to the Masters in Literacy Program in Fall and Spring semesters, a required orientation for all new students will be held. A part of this orientation will include an overview of the portfolio. Fully matriculated teacher candidates who have not attended an orientation should do so at their earliest convenience.

b.) A portfolio check sheet will be kept in the your program file (included in Appendx A). Up to two weeks before the portfolio presentation points in the program, you are encouraged to present your portfolio entries to a faculty member (or your advisor) for preliminary review and feedback. The faculty member's opinions, however, do not necessarily reflect the opinions nor anticipate the determination of the portfolio review committee.

c.) The Professional Teaching Portfolio will be submitted to the Masters in Literacy faculty in a formal review session. You will be given 15 minutes to present your portfolio and then you will leave it for faculty members to review and respond. It will be returned to you within two weeks of your formal presentation. If an unacceptable Professional Teaching Portfolio is submitted, the teacher candidate will be given an opportunity to revise and resubmit the portfolio at the next semester's scheduled review. At each benchmark you will present the newest sections of your portfolio.

Impact on Student LearningThe evidence submitted to demonstrate an impact on student learning should include a range of

achievement typical in your setting. If, for example, you teach in a gifted setting, then the



evidence should demonstrate how your learning has impacted the range of abilities in your gifted

students.

Reflective context statements Reflective context statements accompany each section of your portfolio. These statements should represent your thinking about the product you have chosen to provide as evidence of your competence in each of the standard areas. The statements should include, but are not limited to:

Why you selected the product that you did? What does it show about your competency in the standard area and how does it provide

evidence of that? What changes in your pedagogy does it represent? How has your competency in the standard area impacted student learning? (Submit

evidence)



EVIDENCE of CompetencyThe following chart can be used to plan the portfolio. It lists the areas of evidence that you

should collect and the categories of narrative or student work that you should include:

What evidence of your competency will you present?

How will you demonstrate an impact on your students’ learning

What are the key points you want to make in your reflection statement?

Content Knowledge

(as evidenced in attainment of competency levels within IRA standards)Pedagogical Knowledge To utilize

multiple assessments

To transform one’s knowledge into active practices

Pedagogical Skills To teach

creatively and with ZEST

To improve one’s skills

Professional Skills To construct

knowledge

To develop/ adapt curriculum

Dispositions To collaborate

and reflect

Commitment to urban education

To work toward equity

To make a difference (social justice)



Formative Program Evaluation: Focus Group Interview

I. Explanation of Focus Group and Rules (10 min)Explain Focus Group: as you know, the Hunter College School of Education believes that

continuous “assessment is the foundation upon which instruction, curriculum design and program development should be based.” With this in mind, I have been asked to conduct this focus group in order to find out your attitudes towards the Masters in Literacy Program and whether you feel that the Program meets your needs and expectations.

Please speak freely, there are no correct answers. You have been asked to participate because it was felt that you are representative of all of the students currently in the Program. As such, you are not only speaking for yourself, but for the other students as well. Please keep in mind though that everything that you say will be confidential, and that you will not be identified to anyone.

We really need to hear from everyone, so please don’t be shy.As we need to concentrate on what you say, we will be audio taping this session. Rest assured

that you will not be identified on the tape.It is very important that only one person speak at a time, and that there be no side discussions.Please do not ask me any questions. My opinions are not what is important here, yours are.Don’t be afraid to express your opinion. We are not looking for agreement unless it’s really

there. Let us know what you really think, even if it’s different from everyone else.As we need to cover a series of topics in our allotted time, I will be moving the discussion along.

Please don’t be offended.Any questions?

II. Overall Impression of the Masters in Literacy Program (35 min)A. Personal definition of the Program, and goals upon graduation.B. Most important experiences with the Program.C. Ways in which you feel that the Program has influenced your teaching. D. Aspects of the Program that you find most helpful.E. Your least useful experiences in the Program.F. Aspects of the Program that you believe need improvement.G. Would you recommend the Program to your friends? Why? Why not?

III. Specific Areas of Concern (40 min)A. How do you feel about the admissions process?B. Do you feel that the literacy program offers enough support to the students? C. Is there adequate and appropriate advisement? D. Is the registration process easy to manage? Are courses open and available at a

convenient time? If not, are the provisions for substitutions adequate? E. Are classed scheduled in such a way that the schedule takes into consideration your busy

work schedule as well?F. Are there enough courses, and of a sufficient variety, given during the summer? G. Is there much overlap in subject matter among the various courses? Should there be

more? Less?



H. Should the School of Education offer a full time option in the Literacy Program? Reasons for? If not, why not?

I. How do you feel about the field experiences?

IV. Conclusion (5 min)A. Before we adjourn I would like to take a moment to answer any questions that you may

have for me?B. Great. In closing, let me thank you for having taken time out of your very busy day to

help your school and your department with this extremely important project. Thank you.



Student Program Assessment Questionnaire(to be used at the 12 credit, 18-20 credit hour, and program completion points in the program)To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the Masters in Literacy program. SA = Strongly agree A = Agree D = Disagree SD = Strongly Disagree_____ Most faculty members are genuinely interested in the professional development of the

teacher candidates in the literacy program._____ Different scholarly points of view are encouraged._____ The program is academically demanding._____ The program is relevant to the needs of a contemporary and diverse classroom._____ The program is characterized by a respect for diversity in its teacher candidates, faculty

and in working with school-age students._____ My personal views about literacy are compatible with the objectives and procedures of

the program._____ I am familiar with the goals of the masters in literacy program._____ Teacher candidates in the literacy program are encouraged to be reflective of their

practices._____ Faculty set and maintain consistently high standards for performance._____ Most faculty prepare carefully for their courses._____ The program is receptive to new ideas and ways of doing things._____ The program is responsive to student needs._____ I have learned a great deal as a teacher candidate in this program_____ There is good communication between faculty members and teacher candidates in this

program._____ The coursework in this program is consistent with the goals of the program.Please rate the following aspects of the Masters in Literacy Program, E = Excellent G = Good F = Fair P = Poor NA = Not applicable_____ Intellectual environment_____ Advisement_____ Course workloads in relation to outcomes_____ Agreement between requirements and the goals of the program_____ Scholarly and professional competency of the faculty_____ Academic ability and preparation of other teacher candidates in the program_____ Opportunities for student participation in program decision making._____ Relevance of coursework to your future plans_____ Appropriateness of evaluation procedures_____ Teaching methods used in the coursework_____ Accessibility of faculty members_____ Variety of content in course offerings._____ Depth of subject matter in program offerings._____ Flexibility of program to meet individual needs_____ Opportunities for formal student evaluation of the program and courses._____ Usefulness of faculty critique of student work_____ Faculty helpfulness in dealing with coursework._____ Faculty awareness of developments in the field_____ Relationship between course content and real world teaching dilemmas_____ Overall evaluation of the program



End Program QuestionnaireYou have filled out the following questionnaire twice during your masters program (at the 12

credit and 20 credit points in your coursework). Now that you have completed your masters

program, please think about the program as a whole and rate the following items for the last

time. There is space between items in order for you to elaborate on your response, should you

care to do so. There is also space at the end of the questionnaire for you to make additional

comments.

To what extent do you agree with the following statements about the Masters in Literacy program. SA = Strongly agree A = Agree D = Disagree SD = Strongly Disagree_____ Most faculty members are genuinely interested in the professional development of the

teacher candidates in the literacy program.

_____ Different scholarly points of view are encouraged.

_____ The program is academically demanding.

_____ The program is relevant to the needs of a contemporary and diverse classroom.

_____ The program is characterized by a respect for diversity in its teacher candidates, faculty and in working with school-age students.

_____ My personal views about literacy are compatible with the objectives and procedures of the program.

_____ I am familiar with the goals of the masters in literacy program.

_____ Teacher candidates in the literacy program are encouraged to be reflective of their practices.

_____ Faculty set and maintain consistently high standards for performance.

_____ Most faculty prepare carefully for their courses.

_____ The program is receptive to new ideas and ways of doing things.

_____ The program is responsive to student needs.

_____ I have learned a great deal as a teacher candidate in this program

_____ There is good communication between faculty members and teacher candidates in this program.

_____ The coursework in this program is consistent with the goals of the program.



Please rate the following aspects of the Masters in Literacy Program, E = Excellent G = Good F = Fair P = Poor NA = Not applicable_____ Intellectual environment

_____ Advisement

_____ Course workloads in relation to outcomes

_____ Agreement between requirements and the goals of the program

_____ Scholarly and professional competency of the faculty

_____ Academic ability and preparation of other teacher candidates in the program

_____ Opportunities for student participation in program decision making.

_____ Relevance of coursework to your future plans

_____ Appropriateness of evaluation procedures

_____ Teaching methods used in the coursework

_____ Accessibility of faculty members

_____ Variety of content in course offerings.

_____ Depth of subject matter in program offerings.

_____ Flexibility of program to meet individual needs

_____ Opportunities for formal student evaluation of the program and courses.

_____ Usefulness of faculty critique of student work

_____ Faculty helpfulness in dealing with coursework.

_____ Faculty awareness of developments in the field

_____ Relationship between course content and real world teaching dilemmas

_____ Overall evaluation of the program

Comments:



Tracking survey

Graduates of the Masters in Literacy Program will be mailed a postcard once a year in October to update their information in the EDIMS system. The postcard will be self-addressed and bulk-mail stamped for ease of return. The postcard will ask for the following information.

Name:

Address:

Contact phone number:

Place of employment:Address:

What grade(s) do you teach?

What other responsibilities do you have (in addition to or instead of classroom teaching)?

Are you enrolled in a program for further study?

Are you applying for NBPTS certification? Yes ___ No ___Have you obtained NBPTS certification? Yes ___ No ___



Graduate Summative Program Survey Cover Letter

Dear graduate of the Hunter College Masters in Literacy Program,

We, the faculty of the Literacy Masters Program, hope this letter finds you well and still teaching

with “zest”! As a part of our ongoing efforts to improve the literacy program at Hunter College,

we hope that you will take a few moments to complete the attached survey and mail it back to us

in the enclosed envelope. It should take you about 5 minutes to complete.

We are interested in knowing where you are, what you are doing, and to what extent your masters program has been useful in your teaching career. Do you feel you were prepared effectively to teach literacy? What have been the outcomes of your masters program in your life? What was most beneficial? What could have been better? Now that you have been out of the program for a year or more, we wonder about your experiences and your perspective on the program.

Please take a few minutes to complete the survey. It will be greatly appreciated!!!

Best wishes,

Professor XXXLiteracy Program Coordinator



Graduate Summative Program Survey

When did you graduate?

How many semesters did it take for you to complete your masters program?

Where do you teach?

What do you teach?

How has this changed, if at all, since you were a graduate student?

Have you taken on any leadership roles since graduation?

What are your plans for the future?

Have you made any plans to pursue a higher degree? If so, in what area?

In what ways did the Masters in Literacy Program prepare you for what you are doing now?

What has been the greatest benefit of the literacy masters program?

What has been the least useful part of the literacy masters program?

Would you encourage a colleague to enter the Masters in Literacy Program at Hunter College? If so, why? If not, why not?

If you could come back to Hunter College to take over the Masters in Literacy Program, what would you change?



Employer Cover Letter

Dear Principal XXXXX,

Mr./Ms. XXX graduated from the Masters in Literacy Program at Hunter College in 20XX. As

a part of our ongoing efforts to improve the literacy program at Hunter College, we hope that you

will take a few moments to complete the attached survey and mail it back to us in the enclosed

envelope. It should take you about 5 minutes to complete.

We are interested in knowing how are graduates “measure up” in terms of their effectiveness as teachers and their progress as educators. Do you feel s/he was prepared effectively to teach literacy? What have been the outcomes of his/her masters program? Has the Masters program resulted in improved student learning in his/her classroom? Now that our graduate has been out of the program for a year or more, we wonder about your experiences with him/her and your perspective on the literacy masters program based on this teacher’s performance.

Please take a few minutes to complete the survey. It will be greatly appreciated!!!

Best wishes,

Professor XXXLiteracy Program Coordinator



Employer SurveyYour Name: School:Teacher’s Name: Date:

Has s/he taken on any leadership roles since graduation?

In what ways did the Masters in Literacy Program prepare him/her for what s/he is doing now?

What are his/her greatest strengths as an educator?

What are his/her greatest weaknesses as an educator?

In what areas of literacy is s/he the most effective?

Least effective?

How would you characterize the student learning in his/her classroom as compared to other teachers in your school?

What are the top two indicators you use to assess student learning?

Would you encourage a teacher in your school to enter the Masters in Literacy Program at Hunter College? If so, why? If not, why not?

If you could come to Hunter College to take over the Masters in Literacy Program, what would you establish as priorities in the program?



Faculty program evaluation form

You have now taught in the Masters in Literacy Program for at least two semesters. Please take a moment to answer the following questions. Your responses will help to formulate an agenda for discussion during the next semester with the goal of improving the literacy program and making needed changes. DATE:

What are the strengths of the teacher candidates that you have taught?

What are the areas of challenge?

In your opinion, are the teacher candidates in the program ready and able to benefit from the program course of study?

What are your primary concerns about the program at this point?

What can the program do to alleviate your concerns?

If you could make a change in the program, what would be your first priority?

Is there anything particularly good about the program or its teacher candidates that bears mentioning?

Are there any particular teacher candidates that you are concerned about? If so, in what ways are you concerned?

What do you suggest as an appropriate course of action?



New York State Regulationsfor the Masters in Literacy Program

Appendix B New York State RegulationsFor the Masters in Literacy Program

120

Documents

Hunter Collegect/ScarletN/LitReview.doc · Web viewVariations on a blue guitar. New York, NY: ... XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX teach students to monitor their own word ... Clinical