School of Education Program Review Rejoinder II for Graduate Reading. June 1, 2010

1 1.0 PREVIOUS EVALUATION RESULTS School of Education Program Review Rejoinder II for Graduate Reading June 1, 2010 At the May 15, 2009 Interim New Program Proposal Committee meeting, the following program review rejoinder was evaluated: Reading Motion to accept the rejoinder for items #3, #6, #7 failed unanimously. Motion to accept the rejoinder for item #10 passed unanimously. Area #3: The chart included with the rejoinder is not helpful for addressing the original question. The original alignment chart submitted in B. Content Standards Matrix Section does not provide adequate information for all indicators. As you look to your NCATE visit, the

2 institution should consider standardizing assessment criteria across matrices across content areas. Area #6: Service learning is not appropriate assessment for professional and pedagogical knowledge. One lesson plan and one running record with mini-lesson are not adequate measures for this area. Key assessments used in this report are not rigorous enough to be used as program assessments. The running record assignment is worth 6 % of the total course grade. The committee questions the assignment s relevance as a key assessment for determining pedagogical knowledge.. Area #7: Measures are not in place to ensure that all candidates can adequately assess all students using Indiana Academic Standards. 2.0 RESPONSE TO AREA #3: The following table that aligns the reading content with the standards has been revised (in blue) to indicate the courses in our Graduate Reading Program that have now been taught by our two new tenure-track reading faculty. The additions in blue indicate how most of the standards have been assessed now in our courses thanks to their expertise. Also with these new additions, 75% of the standards are covered now in multiple courses. IPFW School of Education Reading Content Standards Alignment Matrix Assessment Outcomes: (1) Paper, (2) Exam/Quiz; Multiple Choice, T/F, (3) Exam/Quiz: Short Answer, Essay, (4) Project, (5) Lab/Report, (6) Journal Reflection, (7) Lesson Plan, (8) Teaching, (9) Other (specify), 9a (class readings and discussion); 9b (guest speaker/presentation, 9c (examination of the IDOE Website), 9d (multicultural book study), 9e (examination of INTASC standards through a critical lens), 9f (student presentation), 9g (search data bases and retrieve peer-reviewed articles on literacy development in content area), 9h (essay grounded in research), 9i (review of literature), 9j (seminar paper), 9k (seminar dialogue), 9L (review of methods in peer-reviewed literature), 9m (peer feedback to seminar paper), 9n (diversity field experience artifact and reflection), 9o (reflection on scholar-practitioner vision statement), 9p (curriculum assessment), 9q (interview), 9r (metaphor), 9s (metaphor revisited), 9t (classroom observation), 9u (poems), 9v (literature circles), 9w (research design), 9x (IRB approval for research project), 9y (data collection), 9z (research report), 10 (action research project), 11 (diversity field experience)

3 Reading 590 M501 595 X504 X525 X530 Standard # 1: The reading teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and dynamics of the reading process and creates learning experiences that make reading meaningful for the individual student. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530 1. Understands reading as the process of constructing meaning through the interaction of the reader s prior knowledge, the information suggested by the written language, and the purpose for reading. 9i 9a 9z 2. understands cultural, linguistic, and ethnic diversity. 11 5 9a, 9z 9a 3. understands the major theories of language development. 9i 9a 4. understands the impact of a student s affective domain 5 in the reading process. 5. understands the cueing systems (phonological, syntactic, semantic, and pragmatic) of language. 5 9a 6. understands the interrelationship of reading, writing, 9i 9a listening, speaking, viewing, representing thinking. 7. understands the concept of emergent literacy. 9i 5,9a 8. possesses an awareness of reading research that informs instruction. 9i 9i 9z 9. knows classic and cotemporary literature for children and young adults. 9a 9a, 9L 10. understands that goals, instruction, and assessment 7,9a must be aligned. Standard # 2: The teacher understands how students learn and develop reading strategies, and can provide learning opportunities that support their reading development. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530 1. understands how students construct knowledge of reading, acquires specific reading skills, develop habits of mind, and knows how to use instructional strategies that promote student learning in reading. 4 2. understands how the student s physical, social, emotional, moral and cognitive development relate to reading development. 9i 9a 9a

4 3. understands expected developmental progressions and individual variations within each domain (physical, social, emotional, moral, and cognitive), and how these variations affect reading acquisition. 9i 4. understands the particular problems that surround learning to read and the importance of matching appropriate research-based strategies with the individual learner. 5. understands cultural differences in relationship to learning styles, verbal and nonverbal communication 9i 11 9f,w, x,y,z, 10 5 9z styles, and language differences. Standard # 3: The teacher understands how students differ in their approaches of learning to read and creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530 1. understands approaches to learning to read, including different learning styles, multiple intelligences, and performance models. 2. knows about areas of exceptionality in learning; such as learning disabilities, visual and perceptual difficulties, special physical or mental challenges and gifted and talented. 3. knows about the process of second language acquisition and strategies which support students whose first language is not English. 4. understands how learning to read is influenced by individual experiences, talents, and prior learning, as well as language, culture, family and community values. 9i 5,6, 9a 9i 11 9a 5. understands cultural and community diversity and its 11 role in the teaching of reading. Standard #4: The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage student development of critical thinking, problem solving and performance skills. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530 1. understands research-based instructional strategies of reading, writing, listening, and speaking. 9f,w, x,y,z, 10 9a 9a 9a 5,6 9z

5 2. understands the role of child development as it 9a influences reading acquisition. 3. understands exceptionality and learning styles and how to design flexible curriculum to meet individual needs based on student strengths. 4. understands strategies that meet the needs of students; 5,7 such as introducing and implanting grouping practices, sequencing and pacing, a variety of instructional materials, and appropriate technology. 5. understands language acquisition and its relationship to reading development. 11 9a 6. understands the reciprocal relationship between 9a reading and writing. 7. knows how to locate and use educational research 9i 9f,w, 9i 9z 1 using professional journals, libraries, media centers, and information technology to promote student learning. x,y,z, 10 8. knows how to support students as they develop reading independence. 4 9z Standard #5: The reading teacher uses an understanding of individual and group motivations and behaviors to create a learning environment that fosters and interest and growth in all aspects of literacy. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530 1. knows about human motivation, behavior, and literacy 7 9z development and uses this knowledge to develop strategies for organizing and supporting individual and group work in the classroom. 2. understands the importance of grouping students in a variety of ways and the influence of grouping on individual behavior and perceptions. 3. understands the principles of effective classroom 9f 9f management and their influence on student reading acquisition. 4. understands the appropriate expectations for students at each developmental level. 9a, 9z Standard #6: The reading teacher uses knowledge of effective verbal, nonverbal, and media communication techniques to foster active engagement, collaboration and support interaction in the classroom. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530

6 1. understands the teacher s role as a communicator. 2. understands how cultural, linguistic, and ethnic 11 9a 9a diversity foster effective communication in the classroom 3. knows effective verbal and nonverbal communication strategies. 9f 9f 4. understands the use of a variety of media 4 communication tools. Standard #7: The reading teacher plans and manages instruction based upon knowledge of literacy, individual students, community, and curriculum goals. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530 1. understands that environment fosters interest and growth in all aspects of literacy. 2. understands how to use texts and books to stimulate 7, 9a 9z interest, promote reading growth, and foster appreciation for the written word. 3. understands how to increase the motivation of learners 9i to read widely and independently for information, pleasure, and personal growth. 4. understands instructional and information technologies that support literacy learning. 5. Understands the importance of real world applications 9i and has knowledge in generating questions that help students think and read critically. 6. Knows effective strategies that encourage the homeschool 11 connection in the literacy development of children. 7. knows when and how to adjust instructional plans 5, 7 9z based on student knowledge and response. 8. knows the Indiana academic standards for English/ 7 Language Arts, specifically those which apply to reading 9. has an understanding of how the academic standards of other curriculum areas affect reading instruction.

7 Standard #8: The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessments to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical development of the learner. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530 1. knows how to select and construct appropriate 9f,w, 5, 9a assessment tools. xy,z, 2. has knowledge of measurement theory and other related issues such as validity, reliability, bias, and scoring concerns. 3. understands how to use multiple sources of assessment data to help students progress as readers, writers, listeners, speakers and viewers. 4. understands the advantages and limitations of different types of assessments. 10 9f,w, xy,z, 10 9f,w, xy,z, 10 9f,w, xy,z, 10 9a 4, 5, 9a, 9b 6, 9a,9i, Standard #9: The reading teacher is a reflective practitioner who is committed to and actively seeks professional growth. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530 1. understands the history and philosophy of reading instruction. 2. understands the process of learning and reflection and its connection to further learning. 3. understands that teacher reflection affects students learning. 4. understands the process of self-assessment. 5. is aware of professional resources. 6. is aware of the importance of action research. 9i 9f,w, xy,z, 10 9z 1 4, 6 9a 9a 4 9z 7. has knowledge of reading research that informs instruction. 9i 9f,w, x,y,z 9a, 9i Standard # 10: The reading teacher communicates and interacts with families, professional colleagues, and the community to support students learning and will being. Knowledge E590/S590 M501 E595/ S595 X504 X525 X530 1. has knowledge of community demographics. 11 9z 2. is aware of community agencies, organizations, and 11 9z

8 businesses that support the health, well being, and education of children. 3. knows the importance of using the resources of the school to help individual students. 4. knows that factors in a student s environment influence learning. 4 9z 11 9a 9z 3.0 RESPONSE TO AREA #6 6. To what degree does the program prepare candidates in professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills? 3.1 OVERVIEW For Area #6, we conceptualized the candidates professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills in three ways. The first was through one example of course-work; the second used the NBPTS Core Propositions as the guiding points for candidates analysis of the interactive process of teaching and learning for themselves, as well as for their students. The third way was through our conceptual framework that also addresses issues of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, such as democracy, habits of mind, multiple pedagogies, content knowledge, and leadership. Finally, the evidences presented in Area #7 and #3 also provide a larger view of the reading knowledge and pedagogical skills required by our candidates. 3.2 ADDITIONAL CONTEXT OF 1ST EVIDENCE FROM COURSE -DIAGNOSING AND PLANNING FOR READING DIFFICULTIES This 1st evidence is an extension of the one provided in the first rejoinder under Area #6. Additional information is provided so that the extent of the assignment can be seen more clearly. Because diagnosing reading difficulties and designing plans to address those difficulties are vital parts our graduate reading program, this cannot be minimized or left out. However, we realize that presenting it solo, as was done previously, did not indicate the scope of our program.

9 One of the multiple-part course assignments for X504 (Diagnosis of Reading Difficulties in the Classroom) that is taught once a year is to design a mini-focused lesson plan based on the result of the Running Record. To correct a student s reading problems effectively, the first task that a reading teacher should perform is to identify and diagnose the specific reading programs which the student might have. The assignment highlights the assessment of reading difficulties, interpretation of results, writing reports, and designing a plan to address the reading difficulties. For this assignment, the candidates first get an intensive training on giving the Running Record from the instructor and the in-service Reading Recovery teacher. They learn not only how to give the assessment but also how to interpret the results of the assessment. The candidates are reminded that the main purpose of this assignment is to enhance a student s reading skills, not just diagnosing reading problems. After training, the candidates administer the Running Record to a student in their elementary or secondary class who is struggling with reading. After the assessment, they write a short paper/report describing their observations and their analysis of the Running Record. Each candidate then designs a mini-focused lesson plan based on his/her student s result from the Running Record and observations. This assignment is associated with several IPSB standards. By successfully completing this assignment, students can demonstrate their competence in 1. designing a reading lesson plan (IPSB #7) based on diagnostic information(ipsb #4) 2. reflecting on the processes and analyzing the results of the assessment (IPSB #3 and #10) 3. conducting a variety of informal assessments to evaluate children s development of reading skills (IPSB #8) 3.3 DATA of 1st EVIDENCE Because the weighted point system used previously is not universally used, the data have been converted to frequencies and percents for this report. Running Records Project Grade FREQUENCY of Grade n=13 93-100% (A) 6

10 90-92% (A-) 5 87-89% (B+) 0 84-86 % (B) 2 3.3.1 SUMMARY OF DATA RESULTS FROM COURSE The candidates ability to use their professional and pedagogical skills via the assessments and planning are important for impacting students learning in appropriately differentiated ways. As the data indicate, 100% of the candidates achieved a grade of B or higher from this multiple-part assignment, thus meeting a satisfactory or better indication of their professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills regarding diagnosing and making plans to address students reading difficulties. 3.4 2 nd EVIDENCE PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS ANALYSIS IN PRACTICE 3.4.1 CONTEXT The next set of evidence was gathered from the Graduate Reading Methods Courses, X516 and X545 (Adv. Study in the Teaching of Reading in the Jr. Hi. / Sec. Schools or Elem. Schools, respectively), which are offered once a year. Because this is a graduate level course, it is important that our candidates are able to assess their own awareness of their professional and pedagogical knowledge, strategies, motivations/commitments to students learning, assessment processes, and how they are able to keep learning new content and techniques in the field. As we encourage P-12 students to gain the ability to give themselves feedback, as well as receive it from others, we encourage our graduate candidates to do this also with artifacts from their teaching (as indicated in the directions below). As part of this process, the university instructors also evaluate the candidates evidence and reflective analyses as a way to more finely tune the candidates feedback and growth process regarding their professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. 3.4.2 DIRECTIONS

11 1) Description of Artifact [For Methods (except T2T) and Curriculum courses, artifact must be related to the method course you are taking and include evidence of collected and analyzed individual P-12 student achievement data.] 2) Analyze how the artifact demonstrates your growth in the 5 Core Propositions of the NBPTS Standards: The National Board for Professional Teaching Standards seeks to identify and recognize teachers who effectively enhance student learning and demonstrate the high level of knowledge, skills, abilities, and commitments reflected in the following propositions. Proposition #1: Teachers are committed to students and their learning. Teachers recognize individual differences in their students and adjust their practice accordingly; Teachers have an understanding of how students develop and learn; Teachers treat students equitably; Teachers mission extends beyond developing the cognitive capacity of their students. Proposition #2: Teachers know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students. Teachers appreciate how knowledge in their subjects is created, organized and linked to other disciplines; Teachers command specialized knowledge of how to convey a subject to students; Teachers generate multiple paths to knowledge. Proposition #3: Teachers are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning. [For Methods (except T2T) and Curriculum courses, comment here on evidence of collected and analyzed individual P-12 student achievement data.] Teachers call on multiple methods to meet their goals; Teachers orchestrate learning in group settings; Teachers place a premium on student engagement; Teachers regularly assess student progress; Teachers are mindful of their principal objectives. Proposition #4: Teachers think systematically about their practice and learn from experience. Teachers are continually making difficult choices that test their judgment; Teachers seek advice of others and draw on educational research and scholarship to improve their practice. Proposition #5: Teachers are members of learning communities. Teachers contribute to school effectiveness by collaborating with other professionals; Teachers work collaboratively with parents;

12 Teachers take advantage of community resources. 3) Your paper, description plus analysis, should be at least 1 single-spaced, typewritten page. *An artifact from an educational setting could include, for example, lesson plans and P-12 student work,* videotaping of teaching, or other evidence to show progressive effectiveness as an educator. The effectiveness may not directly relate to the course taken in the SOE at the same time, but should reflect general raised consciousness and critical reflection, fostered by the program, about the processes that impact the planning, execution, and outcomes of educational practice. *[For Methods (except T2T) and Curriculum courses, artifact must include evidence of collected and analyzed individual P-12 student achievement.] 3.4.3 RUBRIC (continued below)

13

14 3.4.4 DATA The evidence represents the frequencies of scores posted by the instructors regarding their analysis of the candidates teaching evidence in relation to the core NBPTS propositions. Summary of X516 - NBPTS N=8 Prop 1 Prop 2 Prop 3 Prop 4 Prop 5 Overall Average Averages 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 Rating Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency 4 6 6 6 6 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 Summary of X545 - NBPTS Overall N=7 Prop 1 Prop 2 Prop 3 Prop 4 Prop 5 Average Averages 3.29 3.43 3.29 3.29 3.57 3.37 Rating Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency 4 3 4 3 3 5 3 3 2 3 3 1 2 1 1 1 1 1

15 3.4.5 SUMMARY The data indicate that our candidates scores ranged from 2-4 on a 4 point scale, meaning that all candidates provided fair to excellent evidence of their teaching and analyses in relation to the NBPTS Core Propositions. In the X516 course, 75% of the candidates received excellent ratings, while 86% of the candidates in X545 received a rating of good or excellent. More specifically, all of the candidates provided evidence (at fair to excellent levels) related to how they addressed some of the following in their classroom: individual or developmental differences, the social/emotional/or physical needs of the child as well as cognitive needs, equity issues, multiple approaches, content knowledge expertise and integration with other subjects, positive student engagement, improving their practice using various resources, and making contributions to the school and parents. 3.5 3rd EVIDENCE PEDAGOGICAL KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLS ANALYSIS IN PRACTICE EVIDENCED THROUGH THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK 3.5.1 CONTEXT Similarly to the second set of evidence, the third set of evidence was gathered from the Graduate Reading Methods Courses, X516 and X545 (Adv. Study in the Teaching of Reading in the Jr. Hi. / Sec. Schools or Elem. Schools, respectively), which are offered once a year. Again because this is a graduate level course, it is important that our candidates are able to assess their own awareness of their professional and pedagogical knowledge growth as it is being developed through the university s School of Education Conceptual Framework. The conceptual framework professional and pedagogical issues include the following: democracy, community, habits of mind, knowledge of content and dispositions, pedagogy for social and cognitive development, experience and leadership with a cultural vision.

16 After the candidates provide the artifacts of their choosing from the course and analyze their own learning with respect to the conceptual framework, the university instructors also evaluate the candidates evidence and reflective analyses as a way to more finely tune the candidates feedback and growth process regarding their professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills. 3.5.2 DIRECTIONS Provide an artifact from the course, with a description of the artifact and reflection/analysis (2 single-spaced typed pages) on how the artifact shows the candidate s growth on the six areas of the Conceptual Framework. 1) Description of Artifact 2) Reflections on how this demonstrates your learning and understanding in the six areas of the Conceptual Framework: #1 Democracy & Community #2 Habits of Mind #3 Knowledge #4 Pedagogy #5 Experience #6 Leadership. 3) Your paper, description plus reflection/analysis, should be at least 2 single-spaced, typewritten pages. Democracy & Community Effective educators, such as teachers, counselors, and administrators, need to be a part of a dynamic educational community as a model for the climate of community they hope to create. To do this, these educators need an understanding of the moral, cultural, social, political, and economic foundations of our society. Consequently, the SOE should foster a democratic, just, inclusive learning community among its students, faculty, and staff and with all other stakeholders in the educational enterprise.

17 Habits of Mind Effective educators realize that knowledge alone is not sufficient. They practice critical reflection in all endeavors. Within the context of a compassionate, caring community, educators foster habits of mind necessary to engage learners, such as investigating, inquiring, challenging, critiquing, questioning, and evaluating. Consequently, the SOE must integrate critical habits of mind in all aspects of the teaching/learning process. Pedagogy Effective educators need to understand multiple approaches to pedagogy as well as the multiple roles of the teacher, such as facilitator, guide, role model, scholar, and motivator. Educators appreciate and are receptive to the diverse perspectives, modes of understanding, and social circumstances that they and their students bring to the educational setting. Consequently, the SOE needs to prepare educators to understand and use pedagogy creatively and thereby ensure active learning, conceptual understanding, and meaningful growth. Knowledge Effective educators need to be well-grounded in the content which they expect to teach. Educators need to understand how knowledge is constructed, how the processes of inquiry are applied, how domains of knowledge are established, and how disciplines can be integrated and most effectively communicated to their students. Educators also need understanding of themselves, of communities in which they intend to teach, and of students. Consequently, the SOE should immerse educators in nurturing learning communities that deepen knowledge, and encourage ongoing intellectual, emotional, and personal growth. Experience Effective educators learn their craft through experiences in actual educational settings. Through on-site campus activities and field-based experiences, students will observe and emulate exemplary teaching and learning. These educators will practice, collaborate, and interact with practitioners and their students. Consequently, the SOE must integrate field and/or clinical

18 experiences that reflect the diversity of educators, students, and schools into all aspects of the curriculum, and help educators to assess and reflect on those experiences. Leadership Effective educators are leaders. They have developed educational and social visions informed by historical and cultural perspectives. They strive to set the highest goals for themselves and inspire students to do likewise. Educators are enriched by the convergence of knowledge, theory, and practice as they optimistically face the educational challenges of the twenty-first century. Consequently, the SOE must provide opportunities for educators to develop as leaders in their profession and in their communities. Educator is broadly defined as pre-service and in-service teachers, administrators, and counselors. 3.5.3 RUBRIC

19

20 3.5.4 DATA The evidence represents the frequencies and scores of our candidates teaching documentation in relation to the university s School of Education conceptual framework. Summary of X516 - Conceptual Framework N=8 CF 1 CF 2 CF 3 CF 4 CF 5 CF 6 Overall Average Averages 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 Rating Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency 4 6 6 6 6 6 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 0 Summary of X545 - Conceptual Framework N=7 CF 1 CF 2 CF 3 CF 4 CF 5 CF 6 Overall Average Averages 3.71 3.71 3.57 3.71 3.71 3.57 3.67 Rating Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency Frequency 4 6 5 5 6 6 5 3 0 2 1 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 1 1 0

21 3.5.5 SUMMARY Similarly to our 2 nd set of evidence provided above, the data in this 3 rd section indicate that our candidates scores also ranged from 2-4 on a 4 point scale, meaning that all candidates provided fair to excellent evidence of their methods course work in relation to the Conceptual Framework pedagogical and professional concepts and skills. In the X516 course, 75% of the candidates received excellent ratings, while 86% of the candidates in X545 received a rating of good or excellent. The average ratings on each of the conceptual framework categories ranged from 3.5 to 3.71. 3.6 SUMMARY OF AREA #6 As mentioned previously in the overview of this Area #6 section, we conceptualized the candidates professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills in three ways. The first was through one example of course-work; the second was in a more general way that used the NBPTS Core Propositions as the guiding points for candidates analysis of the interactive process of teaching and learning for themselves, as well as for their students. The third way was through our conceptual framework that also addresses issues of professional and pedagogical knowledge and skills, such as democracy, habits of mind, multiple pedagogies, content knowledge, and leadership. Finally, the evidences presented in Area #7 and #3 also provide a larger view of the reading knowledge and pedagogical skills required by our candidates. Evidence provided in the three conceptualization sections above indicated that all of the candidates demonstrated fair to excellent examples of their teaching, as well as continued development and understanding of their own professional and pedagogical knowledge. 4.0 AREA #7 4.1 RESPONSE TO AREA #7

22 The assignment presented as evidence, below, for Area #7 provides one example and a point of evidence that illustrates the candidates ability to impact students learning in relation to the state standards and incorporates some language art components. 4.1.1 CONTEXT The evidence that is provided is from one assignment from X525 (Practicum in Reading). This assignment highlights the importance of candidates assisting a group of their students with investigating and incorporating the following - the context, interest assessment, motivation, critical inquiry involving research, perspective-taking, different writing genres, documentation of standards met, and the provision of feedback and guidance. It is important to note that this assignment does not take a standards-first approach that identifies the standard(s) to be covered and then designs a lesson or unit around the standard(s). Instead, it takes a more authentic approach to learning that will also guarantee that appropriate standards will be covered in the process. As a result, it is important for our candidates (as teachers) to document the standards that occurred during the learning process so that they and others are aware of what has been covered and what still needs to be covered. 4.1.2 DIRECTIONS for EVIDENCE Project Report (35 points) You will choose an issue of your interest to explore for the project. The issue should be related to reading or literacy. Your report should meet the following guidelines: a. Contextualize the group of students, the researcher, and the relationship between the researcher and the students. Also describe where and when the research is conducted. b. Start with personal and cultural resources: The choice of the issue should be made based on your interaction with, and understanding of, the students. The issue may be formulated in the form of an inquiry question, yet it has to be contextualized and justified. Explain how the issue is related to your students. Build your inquiry on your students interests, needs, passions, life (see Chapters 2, 3, and 4). This view is in direct contrast to the traditional approach where the students weakness/problem are identified as a basis for intervention. The latter approach is called deficit-based instruction (p. 145). In this project, we want to focus on what our students can do instead of what they can t do. They will feel empowered through the inquiry.

23 c. Link the personal to critical social practices: Once your students personal knowledge, interests, and issues are identified, they should be tapped into to accomplish the intended objective. But even though we start with the personal, it is always embedded in the social, and never enough. In a critical curriculum we emphasize how understandings are never individual or autonomous that they always have social, cultural, and political dimensions (p. 19). As a result, the inquiry should engage the students in four dimensions that consist of critical social practices: o Disrupting the commonplace (see Chapter 5). o Interrogating multiple viewpoints (see Chapter 6). o Focusing on the socio-political (see Chapter 7). o Taking action to promote social justice (see Chapter 8). You are not required to address all four dimensions in your report though you are encouraged to discuss as many as you can. d. Take a critical stance: It can be you, your students, or both that represent a critical stance through the inquiry (see Chapter 9). o Consciously engaging o Entertaining alternate ways of being o Taking responsibility to inquire o Being reflexive Again, you are not required to address all of them in your report though you are encouraged to discuss as many as you can. e. Because this assignment does not take a standards-first approach, it is important to review and document which standards your students have actually learned through this project. f. Prepare a 7-page, double-spaced report (you can document your inquiry in the format of a vignette which can be found in the beginning of each chapter). You can also find an example (summarized in a table) of how b, c, and d are tied to one another right after the discussion of each vignette (except for Chapter 1). g. Present your research to the class. You are encouraged (but not required) to invite any of your students to co-present the research. The format is flexible use your creativity. 4.1.3 RUBRIC Items of Evaluation Scale

24 1. The inquiry is clearly contextualized 1----2----3----4----5 2. Personal and cultural resources are identified 1----2----3----4----5----6 3. Critical social practices are discussed and linked to the personal 1----2----3----4----5----6----7----8 4. The process of taking a critical stance is reflected upon 1----2----3----4----5 5. State Standards of students actual learning are documented 1----2----3----4----5 6. The report is organized in a logical way 1----2----3 7. Mechanics (APA, grammar, punctuation ) 1----2----3 8. Project presentation 1----2----3----4----5 9. Project proposal (write-up & presentation) 5----6----7----8----9----10 Total /50 4.1.4 DATA Individual Candidates # of Standards Met with Students Inquiry Projects Grade Level for students learning 1. 5 2 2. 5 2 3. 3 3 4. 6 7 5. 5 7 6. 4 8 7. 3 10 8. 1 11 Average 4

25 FREQUENCY Project Grade % of Grade 1 100 1 97 1 96 2 93 3 92 4.1.5 SUMMARY OF DATA All Candidates achieved a 92% or higher grade on the project based on the rubric presented above. Even though the project was not designed to be a standards-first type of lesson, it was important to document the success of the candidates professional skills of having their students learn and meet state standards. The data indicate that the students projects were able to meet an average of 4 standards. While candidate #8 met fewer standards, the one standard that was met was the following standard, which was multi-faceted: 11.4 Students write coherent and focused texts that show a well-defined point of view and tightly reasoned argument. The writing demonstrates students' progression through the stages of the writing process (prewriting, writing, editing, and revising). 5.0 FINAL SUMMARY Areas #3, 6 and 7 have been addressed in this rejoinder. More data and analyses have been included to demonstrate (a) greater alignment of the reading content standards with our courses, (b) the professional and pedagogical skills

developed in our program and the candidates teaching, and (c) the impact of our candidates teaching on student learning of content and standards. 26