EECE 613: Literacy Instruction and Assessment: A Historical Perspective ... ?· EECE 613: Literacy Instruction…

Download EECE 613: Literacy Instruction and Assessment: A Historical Perspective ... ?· EECE 613: Literacy Instruction…

Post on 01-Sep-2018

212 views

Category:

Documents

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

<ul><li><p>MSU Moorhead / EECE 613 / Page 1 of 9 </p><p>EECE 613: Literacy Instruction and Assessment: A Historical Perspective (3 credits) Instructor: Barbara Martin Email: martinba@mnstate.edu </p><p> Course Description The study and analysis of literacy learning theories as the basis for examining current instructional programs and practices. Prerequisite: Licensed teaching experience and evidence of reading foundations coursework or consent of instructor. </p><p> This course is designed to help students begin to consider research, theory, and best practices related to literacy instruction and assessment in order to examine current instructional programs and practices. The course readings, class discussion and activities, written assignments, and practicum will help students situate current best practices within a historical context. </p><p>Knowledgeable: MSUM candidates display competence in their subject matter, built upon a strong grounding in liberal studies. MSUM candidates understand the principles of learning, assessment and technology. They understand and apply legal and ethical considerations in all aspects of their work. MSUM candidates are able to integrate theory and practice, and view learning as an active process. MSUM candidates demonstrate the ability to model connections between philosophical foundations and best practices in the field. As life-long learners, MSUM candidates engage in research and complex thinking. They design opportunities for others to seek knowledge and to understand themselves as members of the world community. Reflective: MSUM candidates engage in thoughtful analysis of the meaning and significance of their actions, decisions, and results with regard to their work in order to assess progress in meeting this guiding principle. It is through this reflective process that instruction is improved, new ideas are implemented, ineffective methodologies are abandoned, and learning outcomes for students are enhanced. MSUM candidates are skilled at analyzing their teaching from a variety of perspectives and identifying connections between teaching strategies and student learning. In addition, candidates utilize a variety of techniques to question their procedures and consider alternatives for instruction and student growth. MSUM candidates are able to recognize learning, motivational, and developmental variables in their instructional practice and relate those dimensions to their teaching practices. Finally, MSUM candidates bring a questioning spirit to received wisdom and conventional practice when needed. </p></li><li><p>MSU Moorhead / EECE 613 / Page 2 of 9 </p><p>Humanistic: MSUM candidates value the personal worth of each individual. This is based on a belief in people's potential and innate ability to develop to their fullest. MSUM candidates' actions are grounded in knowledge of different cultural and ethnic groups within the world community, and in knowledge of the influence of culture and history, ethnicity, language, gender and socio-economics on one's life. This knowledge base informs candidates' decision-making as they create environments that promote freedom, compassion, and success for all learners. MSUM candidates are fair-minded in their interactions with others, as well as sensitive to and accepting of individual differences. Further, MSUM candidates have an understanding of aesthetics and the diversity that is part of the human experience and will incorporate this knowledge into their work. MSUM candidates recognize and accommodate a variety of linguistic and nonlinguistic interpersonal skills in their actions with others. MSUM candidates foster resiliency in the students with whom they work, and model these qualities in their own work. Creative: MSUM candidates understand the powerful resources of the arts and sciences, and use their knowledge of these areas to bring the best of their imaginative and creative acts into the classroom. MSUM candidates recognize the important role creativity plays in the design of instruction and classroom environment they will, for them and for their students, meet new situations with resourcefulness, excitement and curiosity, with an investigative attitude, and with the ability to pose, seek and design solutions to problems. MSUM candidates are cognizant of the aesthetic elements of the world and draw on that knowledge to make curricular decisions designed to help students not only learn about aesthetics, but to also learn how to think about the world at large. Course Objectives/Student Learning Outcomes (From MN Board of Teaching Standards, and aligned with College of Education and Human Services Conceptual Framework: Knowledgeable; Humanistic; Creative; and Reflective). </p><p> Subp. 3. Subject matter standard. A candidate for licensure as a teacher of reading must complete a preparation program under subpart 2, item B, that must include the candidate's demonstration of the knowledge and skills in items A to E. </p><p> A. A teacher of reading must have knowledge of the foundations of reading processes and instruction: (1) demonstrate the ability to support a philosophy of literacy instruction with theory and research; (2) indicate knowledge of reading theories and how these translate into effective practices; (3) apply reading research studies and articulate how these studies impact reading instruction at the </p><p>elementary, middle and high school levels; (4) understand the physical, social, emotional, moral, and cognitive development of children, </p><p>preadolescents, and adolescents as it pertains to reading instruction; (5) understand the progression of reading development (emergent, beginning, transitional, </p><p>intermediate and advanced) and the variations related to cultural and linguistic diversity with a heightened awareness to the needs of struggling readers; </p><p> (6) describe developmental progress in oral language and its relationship to reading; (7) teach and foster emergent reading skills such as phonemic awareness, alphabet recognition, and </p><p>understanding that printed words convey meaning; (8) teach and foster word recognition skills including phonics, structural analysis and contextual </p><p>analysis; </p></li><li><p>MSU Moorhead / EECE 613 / Page 3 of 9 </p><p> (9) foster the development of an initial sight vocabulary and an increasingly larger and more </p><p>complex vocabulary, mastering word-learning strategies such as the use of context and structural analysis, and developing word consciousness; </p><p> (10) teach and foster fluency and automaticity in both oral and silent reading; (12) teach comprehension strategies such as adjusting reading approach, activating background </p><p>knowledge, summarizing, generating questions, constructing mental representations and self monitoring; </p><p> (13) teach and foster critical thinking skills and behaviors such as thinking independently, </p><p>withholding judgment, recognizing point of view and bias and considering multiple solutions B. A teacher of reading must be able to use a wide range of instructional practices, approaches, methods and curriculum materials to support reading instruction: (1) organize and manage effective reading instruction appropriate across developmental levels, </p><p>proficiency and linguistic backgrounds; (2) implement a variety of appropriate grouping strategies including individual, small group and </p><p>whole group reading instruction; </p><p>E. A teacher of reading must view professional development as a career-long effort and responsibility including: (1) Serve as a role model and display positive attitudes toward literacy in the district/building by </p><p>engaging in reading and writing practices; (2) Promote &amp; facilitate ongoing self-reflection related to teaching and student learning; </p><p> (5)Actively seek opportunities to participate in learning communities and professional organizations; (7)Engage in, initiate, implement, and evaluate professional development programs; (8)Understand current state and federal legislation as it relates to reading. Instructional Strategies Instructional strategies for this course will include class reading, online discussion, individual and group research projects. Course Requirements The following course requirements are designed to help you examine what the research literature (both historically and today) has to say with regard to reading instruction and assessment, as well as to examine your own and others ideas about that body of literature in order to better understand current views of best practice in reading instruction and assessment: </p><p> Class Discussion (10 pts per post twice weekly =180pts): Candidates are expected to thoughtfully </p><p>engage in biweekly class discussions via Desire To Learn about course topics and the application of </p></li><li><p>MSU Moorhead / EECE 613 / Page 4 of 9 </p><p>course learning during practicum experiences. Class discussion of weekly topics will be used to evaluate candidates acquisition of knowledge, based on candidates: </p><p>Response Accuracy &amp; Depth (comments demonstrate accurate grasp, understanding and application of assigned readings and comments of fellow candidates) Professional dispositions (tone of voice, professional mannerisms, demonstrated respect for others points of view, willingness to consider new information or viewpoints, collaborate well with peers) </p><p> Wimba Participation (15 pts x 5 = 75 pts): Candidates will participate in a online class discussions via Wimba during four different mandatory sessions. All candidates will earn participation points based upon assignment readiness, discussion participation and group collaboration during the online Wimba sessions. Sessions are mandatory and cannot be replaced or made up if missed. </p><p> Reading-Curriculum Analysis (20pts x 6=120 pts) Candidates will closely examine reading </p><p>programs for alignment with best-practice reading research, and with federal, state, and local reading mandates, and district-level policies. This will be an ongoing small-group project for the course and is designed to help you develop an in-depth understanding of how to evaluate reading curriculum. </p><p>NOTE: These papers have been identified as a PRIMARY assessment of candidates knowledge acquisition for standard B1, B2 </p><p> Synthesis Papers (25pts x 2= 50 pts) Candidates understanding of course readings will be assessed through their writing of two synthesis papers in which they link the history of research for a particular reading component with current federal and state education policies and instructional best practices. The papers will address emergent reading issues word recognition, vocabulary development, fluency/automaticity, comprehension and metacomprehension , and assessment issues. </p><p>NOTE: these papers have been identified as the PRIMARY assessments for candidates to demonstrate knowledge of emergent reading skills and word identification identified in standards A1- A10, A12, A13 </p><p> Case Study Report (50 pts) Candidates will create a field portfolio in which they keep students assessment data, lesson plans, and student work samples that document emergent reading abilities, as well as teaching reflections that document candidates understanding of emergent reading skills in a teaching and learning context. Candidates will use evidence from the portfolio to write a case study report of learning from a previous field experience. </p><p>NOTE: this assignment has been identified as a PRIMARY assessment for candidates to apply with students their knowledge of emergent reading skills and word identification identified in standards A1- A10, A12, A13. </p><p> Professional Organizations Resources Guide (25 pts) Candidates will collaborate to develop a resource guide of written and electronic documents to foster their own and others professional development to improve literacy instruction. (for example: national, state, regional meetings; consultants, speakers, websites) available from selected professional organizations (e.g., CEC, NCTE, IRA, ALA, ACEI, NAEYC) for one area related to the improvement of literacy. The resource guide will be shared with and evaluated by peers. </p><p>NOTE: this assignment has been identified as a PRIMARY learning opportunity and assessment for candidates to demonstrate their knowledge of available professional reading resources identified in standard E1. E2, E5, E7, E8 </p><p>Assignment Point Value Class Discussion 10 pts per post twice weekly = 180pts Reading Curriculum Analysis 20pts x 6 = 120 pts Synthesis Papers 25 pts x 2 = 50pts Case Study Report 50 pts Professional Organization Resource Guide 25 pts Wimba Participation 5 x 15pts = 70pts Quizzes 15 x 4 = 60 pts Total 560 pts </p><p> Evaluation Standard/Course Grading Policy </p></li><li><p>MSU Moorhead / EECE 613 / Page 5 of 9 </p><p>Grade A B C D F Total-Points 100-90 89-90 79-70 69-60 Below 60 </p><p> Required Texts/Readings State of Minnesota K-12 Standards for Reading and Writing </p><p>(http://education.state.mn.us/html/intro_acad_standards.htm) Click on Academic Standards in Language Arts (on the left-hand menu) </p><p> Reading-related sections of No Child Left Behind *Allen, K. D., et. al., Reading Comprehension Improvement with Individualized Cognitive Profiles and </p><p>Metacognition. Literacy Research and Instruction v. 47 no. 2 (2008) p. 124-39 *Cheesman, E. A., et. al., First-Year Teacher Knowledge of Phonemic Awareness and Its Instruction. Teacher Education and Special Education v. 32 no. 3 (August 2009) p. 270-89 *Fisher, P. Learning about Literacy: From Theories to Trends. Teacher Librarian v. 35 no. 3 (February 2008) p. 8-12 *Law, C., et. al., An Analysis of the Use of Critical Thinking Skills in Reading and Language Arts Instruction. Reading Improvement v. 46 no. 1 (Spring 2009) p. 29-34 *MacInnes, G. Preschool and Early Reading. Education Week v. 28 no. 32 (May 20 2009) p. 22-3 *Marzano, R. J. Six Steps to Better Vocabulary Instruction. Educational Leadership v. 67 no. 1 (September </p><p>2009) p. 83-4 *McGee, L. M., et. al., Using Scaffolding to Teach Phonemic Awareness in Preschool and Kindergarten. The </p><p>Reading Teacher v. 62 no. 7 (April 2009) p. 599-603 *Mercier Smith, J. L., et. al., Planning, Evaluating, and Improving Tiers of Support in Beginning Reading. Teaching Exceptional Children v. 41 no. 5 (May/June 2009) p. 16-22 *Morris, D., et. al., Transformative teaching in a developmental reading program. Journal of College Reading and Learning v. 39 no. 1 (Fall 2008) p. 88-93 *Nixon, S., et. al., Enhancing Comprehension and Retention of Vocabulary Concepts through Small-group Discussion: Probing for Connections among Key Terms. Journal of College Science Teaching v. 38 no. 5 (May/June 2009) p. 18-21 *Palumbo, A., et. al., Helping Struggling Middle School Literacy Learners Achieve Success. The Clearing House v. 82 no. 6 (July/August 2009) p. 275-80 *Pikulski, J. J., et. al., Fluency: Bridge between decoding and reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher v. 58 no. 6 (March 2005) p. 510-19 </p><p>*Rasinski, T. V., et. al., Oral reading in the school literacy curriculum. Reading Research Quarterly v. 38 no. 4 (October...</p></li></ul>