Program Report for the Preparation of Reading
Education Professionals
International Reading Association (IRA)
Option C
NATIONAL COUNCIL FOR ACCREDITATION OF TEACHER EDUCATION
COVER SHEET
1. Institution Name
Edinboro University of PA
2. State
Pennsylvania
3. Date submitted
MM
DD YYYY
09
/ 15
/ 2010
4. Report Preparer's Information:
Name of Preparer:
Dr. Denise F. Gaines
Phone:
Ext.
( 814 ) 732 - 2699
E-mail:
dfgaines@edinboro.edu
5. NCATE Coordinator's Information:
Name:
Dr. Lisa Brightman
Phone:
Ext.
( 814 ) 732 - 1328
E-mail:
lbrightman@edinboro.edu
6. Name of institution's program
Masters in Education: Reading
7. NCATE Category
Reading Specialist
8. Grade levels(1) for which candidates are being prepared
K - 12
(1) e.g. K-6, P-12
9. Program Type
j Advanced Teaching
k
l
m
n
j First Teaching License
k
l
m
n
i Other School Personnel
j
k
l
m
n
j Unspecified
k
l
m
n
10. Degree or award level
j Baccalaureate
k
l
m
n
j Post Baccalaureate
k
l
m
n
j Master's
k
l
m
n
j Post Master's
k
l
m
n
i Specialist or C.A.S.
j
k
l
m
n
j Doctorate
k
l
m
n
j Endorsement only
k
l
m
n
11. Is this program offered at more than one site?
j Yes
k
l
m
n
i No
j
k
l
m
n
12. If your answer is "yes" to above question, list the sites at which the program is offered
13. Title of the state license for which candidates are prepared
Reading Spcialist Certification
14. Program report status:
i Initial Review this cycle, Continuing Recognition
j
k
l
m
n
j Response to One of the Folliwing Decisions: Further Development Required or Recognition with
k
l
m
n
Probation
j Response to National Recognition With Conditions
k
l
m
n
15. State Licensure requirement for national recognition:
NCATE requires 80% of the program completers who have taken the test to pass the applicable
state licensure test for the content field, if the state has a testing requirement. Test information and
data must be reported in Section III. Does your state require such a test?
i Yes
j
k
l
m
n
j No
k
l
m
n
SECTION I - CONTEXT
1. Description of any state or institutional policies that may influence the application of IRA
standards. (Response limited to 4,000 characters)
There are no significant changes in state or institutional policies that may influence this application of
IRA standards at Edinboro University’s Masters in Education: Reading. In spring 2009, as noted in the
updated Master of Education Degree: Reading Plan of Study, the following courses were revised
(READ prefixes replaced ELED prefixes), renamed (reflective of most recent initiatives in the field) and
renumbered to reflect curricular updates. These changes were approved by the Program, Department of
Professional Studies and University Wide Curriculum Committee after recommendation and approval
by the School of Education Dean. Changes reflect implementation of Reading focus throughout the
courses in alignment with IRA standards. Assessment rubrics and projects remained unchanged.
Original course name and number
ELED 786 Elementary and Middle School Curriculum Development and Improvement
New course name and number
READ 786 Comprehensive Literacy Curriculum: Design and Implementation
Original course name and number
READ607 Reading and Writing in the Content Areas
New course name and number
READ707 Literacy Instruction for the Content Area Professional
Original course name and number
READ702 Reading and the Special Needs Student
New course name and number
READ702 Literacy Interventions for Striving Readers
Original course name and number
ELED 617 Improving Instruction in Language Arts
New course name and number
READ 717 Language Arts Instruction: Design and Implementation
2. Description of the field and clinical experiences required for the program, including the
number of hours for early field experiences and the number of hours/weeks for student teaching or
internships. (Response limited to 8,000 characters)
There are no significant changes in the field and clinical experiences required for the program. Hours
remained unchanged.
3. Please attach files to describe a program of study that outlines the courses and experiences
required for candidates to complete the program. The program of study must include course titles.
(This information may be provided as an attachment from the college catalog or as a student
advisement sheet.)
Section I POS
See Attachments panel below.
4. This system will not permit you to include tables or graphics in text fields. Therefore any
tables or charts must be attached as files here. The title of the file should clearly indicate the
content of the file. Word documents, pdf files, and other commonly used file formats are
acceptable.
5. Candidate Information
Directions: Provide three years of data on candidates enrolled in the program and completing the
program, beginning with the most recent academic year for which numbers have been tabulated.
Report the data separately for the levels/tracks (e.g., baccalaureate, post-baccalaureate, alternate
routes, master's, doctorate) being addressed in this report. Data must also be reported separately
for programs offered at multiple sites. Update academic years (column 1) as appropriate for your
data span. Create additional tables as necessary.
Program:
READING Teacher Certification
Academic Year
# of Candidates
Enrolled in the
Program
# of Program
Completers(2)
2008-2009
378
116
2007-2008
229
64
2006-2007
159
46
(2) NCATE uses the Title II definition for program completers. Program completers are persons who have met all
the requirements of a state-approved teacher preparation program. Program completers include all those who are documented
as having met such requirements. Documentation may take the form of a degree, institutional certificate, program credential,
transcript, or other written proof of having met the program's requirements.
6. Faculty Information
Directions: Complete the following information for each faculty member responsible for
professional coursework, clinical supervision, or administration in this program.
Faculty Member Name
Beckman, Marian S.
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
Ed.D. in Education (Reading), Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Assignment: Indicate the role
Chairperson, Department of Professional Studies Faculty
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Full Professor
b YES
c
d
e
f
g
Presentations: Beckman, M., Best, L., Gaines, D., Kenny, H., Rahal, B., (2010).
Envisioning and empowering yourself as a literacy leader. Presented at the 43rd
Annual Keystone State Reading Association Conference, Hershey, PA. Beckman,
M., and Dailey, K. (2010). Putting RtI in the vocabulary of coaching. Presented at
the International Literacy Coaching Summit, Corpus Christi, TX. Beckman, M. S.
Scholarship (6), Leadership in (2009). Reading programs are going green: How to develop and deliver an
Professional Associations, and online or hybrid program. Presented to the Association of Literacy Educators and
Service (7):List up to 3 major Researchers, Charlotte, NC. Service: Graduate Reading Program Head through
2009, responsible for revision, accreditations, and major growth of program
contributions in the past 3
years(8)
Literacy in a Multimodal World Conference, Co-Director, (2009 – present).
Edinboro University of PA Vice President (2008-2011) and President-elect:
Keystone State Reading Association Special Interest Group: Pennsylvania
Reading Teacher Educators Reviewer: Literacy Research and Instruction, a
publication of the Association of Literacy Educators and Researchers
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Certifications: Elementary Education Reading Specialist Reading Supervisor
Elementary School Principal Professional Experience: Clinical Supervision Online
Program Coordinator and Instructor Inservice Training for PENNCREST School
District
Faculty Member Name
Best, Linda
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
Ph.D. in Curriculum Instruction & Technology (Literacy) Indiana University of
Pennsylvania
Assignment: Indicate the role
Faculty
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Assistant Professor
g YES
b
c
d
e
f
Publication: Best, L.M. (2010). Lexicon of Online and Distance Learning,
Distinguished Contributing Author, IGI Global, Maryland. Presentations:
Beckman, M., Best, L., Gaines, D., Kenny, H., Rahal, B., (2010). Envisioning and
empowering yourself as a literacy leader. Presented at the 43rd Annual Keystone
State Reading Association Conference, Hershey, PA. Best, L. (2009, October).
Scholarship (6), Leadership in Skype: Passport to multiple literacies - Skype Part I. Presented at Reading,
Professional Associations, and Writing and Literacy In a Multimodal World: A Professional Development
Service (7):List up to 3 major Conference for K-12 Educators, Edinboro, PA. Best, L. (2009, October). What is
Skype and Part II Skype- Web based interactive video conferencing tool: Global
contributions in the past 3
(8)
connections: Teachers meet international students of Aruba via Skype. Presented
years
at Reading, Writing and Literacy In a Multimodal World: A Professional
Development Conference for K-12 Educators, Edinboro, PA. Best, L. (2009,
February). Teaching online and onground: How satisfied are instructors?
Presented at Pennsylvania Educational Technology Exposition & Conference,
Hershey, PA.
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Certifications: Early Childhood Education Reading Specialist Professional
Experience: Supervisor, Student Teachers in PreK-12 school settings Supervisor,
Field Experiences for students in PreK-12 schools Director of Professional
Development, School Relationships, PreK-12 Literacy Consultant, developed,
planned, and organized professional development workshops for PreK-12
teachers
Faculty Member Name
Brightman, Lisa
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
Ed.D., Educational Technology; University of Pittsburgh
Assignment: Indicate the role Faculty; Assistant Chair Early Childhood Department NCATE Assessment
Coordinator
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
(6)
Associate Professor
b YES
c
d
e
f
g
Scholarship , Leadership in
Professional Associations, and
PA Pathways presenter for tri-county region (2006-present); NCATE Assessment
Service (7):List up to 3 major Director; Co-Advisor of KDP, PSEA, and ACEI campus organizations
contributions in the past 3
years(8)
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Supervision of early childhood and elementary field experiences students in K-6;
PA Certification (K-6) Early Childhood Certification, Instructional Technology
Specialist Certification
Faculty Member Name
Dailey, Kathy
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
Ed.D. in Elementary Education, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Assignment: Indicate the role
Faculty
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Full Professor
b YES
c
d
e
f
g
Presentations: Dailey, K., & Tong, L. (2010, October) Examining small group
practices within an RTI framework. Presenting at the 43rd Annual Conference of
the Keystone State Reading Association. Hershey, PA. Beckman, M., and Dailey,
K. (2010). Putting RtI in the vocabulary of coaching. Presented at the
International Literacy Coaching Summit, Corpus Christi, TX. Tong, L, & Dailey, K.
(2010, February). Keeping the reader in mind: assessment and instruction to and
Scholarship (6), Leadership in with readers. Presented at the International Reading Association West Region
Professional Associations, and Conference. Portland, OR. Beckman, M., & Dailey, K. (2009). Putting RTI into the
Service (7):List up to 3 major vocabulary of coaching. Presented at the 42nd Annual Conference of the
Keystone State Reading Association. Hershey, PA. Dailey, K. (2010). Response
contributions in the past 3
(8)
To Intervention. Presented at Edinboro University of Pennsylvania’s Department
years
of Professional Studies’ Annual Retreat, Edinboro, PA. Dailey, K. (2010).
Response To Intervention. Presented at the Edinboro University of
Pennsylvania/General McLane School District Literacy Conference, Edinboro, PA.
Service: Board member, Erie Reading Council, responsibilities include meeting
planning, and registration Member, Selection Committee for Mini Grant and Spirit
of Teaching Awards (Erie Reading Council)
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Certifications: Elementary Education Reading Specialist Professional Experience:
Clinical Supervision Sabbatical (2009), studied the RTI process through reading,
visits, observations, and team meetings at three local school districts.
Literacy/kindergarten consultant, General McLane School District (2007-2008).
Worked with teachers to align full day program with PA Standards; revised
philosophy statement and daily schedules; prepared a document on full day
kindergarten for the General McLane School Board.
Faculty Member Name
Gaines, Denise
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
Ed.D. in Elementary Education/Early Childhood, Indiana University of
Pennsylvania
Assignment: Indicate the role
Graduate Reading Program Head Faculty
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Full Professor
b YES
c
d
e
f
g
Presentations: Beckman, M., Best, L., Gaines, D., Kenny, H., Rahal, B., (2010).
Scholarship , Leadership in Envisioning and empowering yourself as a literacy leader. Presented at the 43rd
Professional Associations, and Annual Keystone State Reading Association Conference, Hershey, PA. Service:
Director of the Edinboro University Community Outreach Center, Edinboro
Service (7):List up to 3 major University of PA University Senate: Vice President and Chair of Committee on
contributions in the past 3
Committees, Edinboro University of Pennsylvania University Wide Curriculum
years(8)
Committee: Chairperson, General Education Subcommittee, Edinboro University
of Pennsylvania
(6)
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Certifications: Elementary Education Reading Specialist Elementary School
Principal/Supervisor Professional Experience: Clinical Supervision Campus
Director of Community Outreach for AmeriCorps VISTA, NWPA Children & Youth
(grant serving children and youth in poverty) Campus Director for Edinboro
University Scholars in Service to PA Americorps Education Award Program (grant
mobilizing college volunteers in service to the community in schools and
nonprofit agencies serving youth
Faculty Member Name
Kenny, Heather
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
Ph.D. in Curriculum & Instruction (Literacy), University of Toledo
Assignment: Indicate the role
Faculty
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Instructor
b YES
c
d
e
f
g
Publications: Kenny, H. (2009). Monkeying Around: Examining the Effects of a
Community Zoo on the Science Achievement of Third Graders (Doctoral
Dissertation). Available from Dissertations and Theses database. (Publication No.
AAT 3394986) Roskos, K., & Kenny, H. (2009). Effective Grouping Practices.
eRead Ohio, https://learn.readingfirstohio.org Roskos, K., & Kenny, H. (2009).
Scholarship (6), Leadership in Developing Adolescents’ Content Vocabulary and Word Power. eRead Ohio,
Professional Associations, and https://learn.readingfirstohio.org Roskos, K., & Kenny, H. (2009). Helping
Service (7):List up to 3 major Adolescent Struggling Readers Rebound. eRead Ohio,
https://learn.readingfirstohio.org Roskos, K., & Kenny, H. (2009). Fostering
contributions in the past 3
(8)
Student’s Comprehension of Texts. eRead Ohio,
years
https://learn.readingfirstohio.org Roskos, K., & Kenny, H. (2009). Supporting the
Adolescent Reader as Strategist. eRead Ohio, https://learn.readingfirstohio.org
Presentations: Beckman, M., Best, L., Gaines, D., Kenny, H., Rahal, B., (2010).
Envisioning and empowering yourself as a literacy leader. Presented at the 43rd
Annual Keystone State Reading Association Conference, Hershey, PA.
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Professional Experience: Clinical Supervision Volunteer, Mercyhurst Preparatory
School (9-12) Performing Arts Boosters
Faculty Member Name
Rahal, Barbara F.
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
Ed.D. in Curriculum & Instruction, West Virginia University
Assignment: Indicate the role
Faculty
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Full Professor
b YES
c
d
e
f
g
Presentations: Beckman, M., Best, L., Gaines, D., Kenny, H., Rahal, B., (2010).
Envisioning and empowering yourself as a literacy leader. Presented at the 43rd
(6)
Scholarship , Leadership in Annual Keystone State Reading Association Conference, Hershey, PA. Rahal, B.
Professional Associations, and (2008). Questioning for Higher-Level Thinking and to Enhance Student Learning.
Presented to the Wattsburg School District teachers, Wattsburg, PA. Service:
Service (7):List up to 3 major Director, PennLake National Writing Project, (Edinboro University of Pennsylvania
contributions in the past 3
Site Host Institution), January 2009 – Present Member, National Advisory Board,
years(8)
for the Achievement Awards in Writing Program, National Council of Teachers of
English Achievement Awards in Writing to recognize excellence in writing for
high school juniors (2005-2012).
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Elementary, Instructional I Elementary Principal, Administrative I Social Studies,
Instructional I
Faculty Member Name
Tong, Lisa
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
D.Ed. in Curriculum & Instruction (Literacy), Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Assignment: Indicate the role
Faculty
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Assistant Professor
b YES
c
d
e
f
g
Publication: Tong, L. (2009, August). Conversations about reading: An evaluation
of the metacognitive processes middle school students utilize while reading
(6)
Scholarship , Leadership in (Doctoral Dissertation). Presentations: Dailey, K., & Tong, L. (2010, October)
Professional Associations, and Examining small group practices within an RTI framework. Presenting at the
43rd Annual Conference of the Keystone State Reading Association. Hershey, PA.
Service (7):List up to 3 major Tong, L, & Dailey, K. (2010, February). Keeping the reader in mind: assessment
contributions in the past 3
and instruction to and with readers. Presented at the International Reading
years(8)
Assoication West Region Conference. Portland, OR. Tong, L. (2009).
Conversations about reading: Metacognitive reading with adolescents. Presented
at the New England Educational Research Organization, Portsmouth, NH.
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Certifications: Elementary Education Language Arts – Middle School Reading
Specialist Professional Experience: Clinical Supervision Secondary Literacy Coach
Special Education Literacy Coach K, 2, 4, & 5th Grade Teacher
Faculty Member Name
Tyler, Karen
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
D.Ed. in Curriculum & Instruction, Indiana University of Pennsylvania
Assignment: Indicate the role
Faculty
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Assistant Professor
c YES
d
e
f
g
Publication: Tyler, K. (2009). The effects of data-driven instruction and literacy
coaching on kindergartners’ literacy development. (Doctoral Dissertation).
Available from Dissertations and Theses database. (Publication No. 3387428)
(6)
Scholarship , Leadership in Service: Volunteer, O’Dessa’s Place (a community outreach program which offers
Professional Associations, and reading and writing experiences for at-risk, inner-city youth, grades 2-12).
Assessed the reading and writing abilities of participating children, provided
Service (7):List up to 3 major data-based curriculum development and literature recommendations. Volunteer,
contributions in the past 3
Erie Day School (Erie, PA). Assisted in curriculum development and professional
years(8)
studies in the areas of literacy, science, mathematics, and social studies.
Volunteer, Harbor Creek School District and Millcreek School Districts. Provided
professional development sessions entitled, Revisiting the writers’ workshop,
Literacy across the curriculum, and Literacy interventions.
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Certifications: Reading Specialist Professional Experience: Full-time literacy coach
for Millcreek Township School District (2007- 2010)
Faculty Member Name
Fuda Daddio, Jessica
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
Ed.D. in Instructional Leadership, Argosy University Online
Assignment: Indicate the role
Adjunct Professor
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Instructor
g YES
c
d
e
f
Scholarship (6), Leadership in
Professional Associations, and
Service (7):List up to 3 major
contributions in the past 3
years(8)
Publications: Fuda, J. (2009). A causal comparative analysis: Comprehensive
literacy approach or the traditional reading approach. (Unpublished Doctoral
Dissertation). Service: Led ongoing learning teams for K-2 teachers (2008present): Phonics Readers’ Workshop Writers’ Workshop
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Certifications: Reading Specialist Elementary Education Literacy Coordinator
(Ohio State University) Professional Experience: Primary Literacy Coordinator,
PENNCREST School District (K-2)
Faculty Member Name
Newman, Terry
Highest Degree, Field, &
University(3)
Ph.D. in Curriculum & Instruction (Literacy Education), University of Maryland
Assignment: Indicate the role
Adjunct Professor
of the faculty member(4)
Faculty Rank(5)
Tenure Track
Instructor
c YES
d
e
f
g
Scholarship (6), Leadership in
Professional Associations, and
Service (7):List up to 3 major
contributions in the past 3
years(8)
Publications: Newman, T. (2009). Factors that motivate students to read during
Sustained Silent Reading (SSR). The Reading Teacher, manuscript currently
under review. Newman, T. (2008). Let me in your classroom. Reading Today, 26
(3), 18. Presentations: Newman, T. (2009). Factors that motives 5th grade
students to read during Sustained Silent Reading. Presented at the International
Reading Association’s Annual Conference, Phonenix, AZ. Service: Member,
Editorial Review Board, The Reading Teacher
Teaching or other
professional experience in P12 schools(9)
Certifications: Reading Supervisor Elementary Education, Instructional II Reading
Specialist, Instructional II Principal, K-12 Professional Experience: Classroom
teacher, 5th & 7th grade Literacy Coach, K-5
(3) e.g., PhD in Curriculum & Instruction, University of Nebraska.
(4) e.g., faculty, clinical supervisor, department chair, administrator
(5) e.g., professor, associate professor, assistant professor, adjunct professor, instructor
(6) Scholarship is defined by NCATE as systematic inquiry into the areas related to teaching, learning, and the education of
teachers and other school personnel.
Scholarship includes traditional research and publication as well as the rigorous and systematic study of pedagogy, and the
application of current research findings in new settings. Scholarship further presupposes submission of one's work for
professional review and evaluation.
(7) Service includes faculty contributions to college or university activities, schools, communities, and professional
associations in ways that are consistent with the institution and unit's mission.
(8) e.g., officer of a state or national association, article published in a specific journal, and an evaluation of a local school
program.
(9) Briefly describe the nature of recent experience in P-12 schools (e.g. clinical supervision, inservice training, teaching in a
PDS) indicating the discipline and grade level of the assignment(s). List current P-12 licensure or certification(s) held, if
any.
SECTION II - LIST OF ASSESSMENTS
In this section, list the 6-8 assessments that are being submitted as evidence for meeting the IRA
standards. All programs must provide a minimum of six assessments. If your state does not require a
state licensure test in the content area, you must substitute an assessment that documents candidate
attainment of content knowledge in #1 below. For each assessment, indicate the type or form of the
assessment and when it is administered in the program.
1. In this section, list the 6-8 assessments that are being submitted as evidence for meeting the
IRA standards. All programs must provide a minimum of six assessments. If your state does not
require a state licensure test in the content area, you must substitute an assessment that documents
candidate attainment of content knowledge in #1 below. For each assessment, indicate the type or
form of the assessment and when it is administered in the program.(Response limited to 250
characters each field)
Type and
Number of
Assessment
Assessment
#1:
Licensure
assessment,
or other
contentbased
assessment
(required)
Assessment
#2:
Assessment
of content
(required)
Assessment
#3:
Assessment
of candidate
ability to
plan
(required)
Assessment
#4:
Assessment
of clinical
practice
(required)
Assessment
#5:
Assessment
of candidate
effect on
student
learning
(required)
When the
Name of
Type or Form
Assessment Is
Assessment of Assessment
Administered
(10)
(11)
(12)
PRAXIS II 0300
Reading
Specialist
Exam
State
Licensure
Exam
MiniResearch
Project
Project/paper
Professional
Development
Project
Multi-media
Presentation
Case Study
Case Study
Clinic
Portfolio
Portfolio
Open
READ 706
READ 710
READ 709
READ 712
Since the
Since the previous Since the previous
submission is this submission is this
previous
assessment
assessment Not
submission is
Substantially
Substantially
this assessment
changed
changed
New
no
no
yes
no
no
yes
no
no
yes
no
no
yes
no
no
yes
Assessment
#6:
Additional
assessment
(required)
Assessment
#7:
Additional
assessment
that
addresses
IRA
standards
(optional)
Assessment
#8:
Additional
assessment
that
addresses
IRA
standards
(optional)
Inclusive
Classroom
Project
Diversity
Project
Supplemental
Literacy
Strategies
for Content
Area
Lessons
Project
Technology
Integration
Project
READ 702
READ 607
ELED 626
no
no
yes
no
no
Yes
Note that the
READ607
has changed
to READ707
in number;
see Plan of
Study notes
no
no
yes
(10) Identify assessment by title used in the program; refer to Section IV for further information on appropriate
assessment to include.
(11) Identify the type of assessment (e.g., essay, case study, project, comprehensive exam, reflection, state licensure test,
portfolio).
(12) Indicate the point in the program when the assessment is administered (e.g., admission to the program, admission to
student teaching/internship, required courses [specify course title and numbers], or completion of the program).
SECTION III - RELATIONSHIP OF ASSESSMENT TO STANDARDS
1. For each IRA standard on the chart below, identify the assessment(s) in Section II that
address the standard. One assessment may apply to multiple IRA standards.
Standard 1 Foundational Knowledge. Candidates have knowledge of the foundations of reading
and writing processes and instruction. As a result, reading specialist/literacy coach candidates:
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7
1.1 Refer to major theories in the foundational areas as they relate to
b g
c
d
e
f
g
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
reading. They can explain, compare, contrast, and critique the theories.
1.2 Summarize seminal reading studies and articulate how these studies
impacted reading instruction. They can recount historical developments in g
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
the history of reading.
1.3 Identify, explain, compare, and contrast the theories and research in the
b g
c
d
e
f
g
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
areas of language development and learning to read.
1.4 Are able to determine if students are appropriately integrating the
components (phonemic awareness, word identification and phonics,
b g
c
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
vocabulary and background knowledge, fluency, comprehension
strategies, and motivation) in fluent reading.
#8
c
d
e
f
g
c
d
e
f
g
c
d
e
f
g
c
d
e
f
g
2. Standard 2. Instructional Strategies and Curriculum Materials. Candidates use a wide range
of instructional practices, approaches, methods, and curriculum materials to support reading and
writing instruction: As a result, reading specialist/literacy coach candidates:
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8
2.1 Support classroom teachers and paraprofessional in their use of
instructional grouping options. They help teachers select appropriate
c g
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
options. They demonstrate the options and explain the evidence-based
rationale for changing configurations to best meet the needs of all students.
2.2 Support classroom teachers and paraprofessionals in the use of a wide
range of instructional practices, approaches, and methods, including
technology-based practices. They help teachers select appropriate options
c g
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b
c
d
e
f
and explain the evidence-base for selecting practices to best meet the
needs of all students. They demonstrate the options in their own (and
demonstration) teaching.
2.3 Support classroom teachers and paraprofessionals in the use of a wide
range of curriculum materials. They help teachers select appropriate
options and explain the evidence base for selecting practices to best meet g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
the needs of all students. They demonstrate the options in their own
teaching and in demonstration teaching.
3. Standard 3. Assessment, Diagnosis, and Evaluation. Candidates use a variety of assessment
tools and practices to plan and evaluate effective reading instruction. As a result, reading
specialist/literacy coach candidates:
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8
3.1 Compare and contrast, use, interpret, and recommend a wide range of
assessment tools and practices. Assessments may range from standardized
tests to informal assessments and also include technology-based
c g
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
assessments. They demonstrate appropriate use of assessments in their
practice, and they can train classroom teachers to administer and interpret
these assessments.
3.2 Support the classroom teacher in the assessment of individual students.
They extend the assessment to further determine proficiencies and
c g
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
difficulties for appropriate services.
3.3 Assist the classroom teacher in using assessment to plan instruction for
all students. They use in-depth assessment information to plan individual
instruction for struggling readers. They collaborate with other education
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
professionals to implement appropriate reading instruction for individual g
students. They collect, analyze, and use school-wide assessment data to
implement and revise school reading programs.
3.4 Communicate assessment information to various audiences for both
accountability and instructional purposes (policymakers, public officials,
c g
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
community members, clinical specialists, school psychologists, social
workers, classroom teachers, and parents).
4. Standard 4. Creating a Literate Environment. Candidates create a literate environment that
fosters reading and writing by integrating foundational knowledge, use of instructional practices,
approaches and methods, curriculum materials, and the appropriate use of assessments. As a
result, reading specialist/literacy coach candidates:
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8
4.1 Assist the classroom teacher and paraprofessional in selecting
materials that match the reading levels, interests, and cultural and
linguistic background of students.
4.2 Assist the classroom teacher in selecting books, technology-based
information, and non-print materials representing multiple levels, broad
interests, and cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
4.3 Demonstrate and model reading and writing for real purposes in daily
interactions with students and education professionals. Assist teachers and
paraprofessionals to model reading and writing as valued lifelong
activities.
4.4 Use methods to effectively revise instructional plans to motivate all
students. They assist classroom teachers in designing programs that will
intrinsically and extrinsically motivate students. They demonstrate these
techniques and they can articulate the research base that grounds their
practice.
c g
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
5. Standard 5. Professional Development. Candidates view professional development as a careerlong effort and responsibility. As a result, reading specialist/literacy coach candidates:
#1 #2 #3 #4 #5 #6 #7 #8
5.1 Articulate the theories related to the connections between teacher
b g
c
d
e
f
g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
dispositions and student achievement.
5.2 Conduct professional study groups for paraprofessionals and teachers.
Assist classroom teachers and paraprofessionals in identifying, planning,
and implementing personal professional development plans. Advocate to g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
advance the professional research base to expand knowledge-based
practices.
5.3 Positively and constructively provide an evaluation of their own or
others’ teaching practices. Assist classroom teachers and paraprofessionals g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
as they strive to improve their practice.
5.4 Exhibit leadership skills in professional development. They plan,
implement, and evaluate professional development efforts at the grade,
school, district, and/or state level. They are cognizant of and can describe g
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
c g
d
e
f
b g
c
d
e
f
c
d
e
f
the characteristics of sound professional development programs. They can
articulate the evidence base that grounds their practice.
SECTION IV - EVIDENCE FOR MEETING STANDARDS
DIRECTIONS: Submit the following documentation for any assessments listed in Section II
as new or substantially changed since previous submission. Submit data on all assessments.
The 6-8 key assessments listed in Section II must be documented and discussed in Section IV.
Taken as a whole, the assessments must demonstrate candidate mastery of the SPA standards.
The key assessments should be required of all candidates. Assessments and scoring guides and
data charts should be aligned with the SPA standards. This means that the concepts in the SPA
standards should be apparent in the assessments and in the scoring guides to the same depth,
breadth, and specificity as in the SPA standards. Data tables should also be aligned with the
SPA standards. The data should be presented, in general, at the same level it is collected. For
example, if a rubric collects data on 10 elements [each relating to specific SPA standard(s)],
then the data chart should report the data on each of the elements rather that reporting a
cumulative score..
In the description of each assessment below, the SPA has identified potential assessments that
would be appropriate. Assessments have been organized into the following three areas to be
aligned with the elements in NCATE’s unit standard 1:
• Content knowledge (Assessments 1 and 2)
• Pedagogical and professional knowledge, skills and dispositions (Assessments 3 and 4)
• Focus on student learning (Assessment 5)
Note that in some disciplines, content knowledge may include or be inextricable from
professional knowledge. If this is the case, assessments that combine content and professional
knowledge may be considered "content knowledge" assessments for the purpose of this report.
For each assessment, the compiler should prepare one document that includes the following
items:
(1) A two-page narrative that includes the following:
a. A brief description of the assessment and its use in the program (one sentence may be
sufficient);
b. A description of how this assessment specifically aligns with the standards it is cited for in
Section III. Cite SPA standards by number, title, and/or standard wording.
c. A brief analysis of the data findings;
d. An interpretation of how that data provides evidence for meeting standards, indicating the
specific SPA standards by number, title, and/or standard wording;
and
(2) Assessment Documentation
e. The assessment tool itself or a rich description of the assessment (often the directions given to
candidates);
f. The scoring guide for the assessment; and
g. Charts that provide candidate data derived from the assessment.
The responses for e, f, and g (above) should be limited to the equivalent of five text pages each ,
however in some cases assessment instruments or scoring guides may go beyond five pages.
Note: As much as possible, combine all of the files for one assessment into a single file. That is,
create one file for Assessment #4 that includes the two-page narrative (items a – d above), the
assessment itself (item e above), the scoring guide (item f above, and the data chart (item g
above). Each attachment should be no larger than 2 mb. Do not include candidate work or
syllabi. There is a limit of 20 attachments for the entire report so it is crucial that you combine
files as much as possible.
1. Data from licensure tests or professional examinations of content knowledge. IRA standards
addressed in this entry could include all of the standards. If your state does not require licensure
tests or professional examinations in the content area, data from another assessment must be
presented to document candidate attainment of content knowledge. Provide assessment information
(items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IV. (Answer required)
Provide assessment information (items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IV
Grad Reading - Assessment 1
See Attachments panel below.
2. Assessment of content knowledge in reading education. IRA standards addressed in this entry
could include but are not limited to 1 and 5. Examples of appropriate assessments include
comprehensive examinations, research reports, child studies, action research, portfolio projects,(13)
and essays. (Answer required)
Provide assessment information (items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IV
Assessment 2: Mini Research Project
See Attachments panel below.
(13) For program review purposes, there are two ways to list a portfolio as an assessment. In some programs a
portfolio is considered a single assessment and scoring criteria (usually rubrics) have been developed for the contents of the
portfolio as a whole. In this instance, the portfolio would be considered a single assessment. However, in many programs a
portfolio is a collection of candidate work—and the artifacts included are discrete items. In this case, some of the artifacts
included in the portfolio may be considered individual assessments.
3. Assessment that demonstrates candidates can effectively plan reading and literacy instruction,
or fulfill other professional responsibilities in reading education. IRA standards that could be
addressed in this assessment include but are not limited to 2, 3, 4, and 5. Examples of assessments
include the evaluation of candidates’ abilities to develop lesson or unit plans or individualized
educational plans. (Answer required)
Provide assessment information as outlined in the directions for Sections III and IV.
Assessment 3: Professional Development Project
See Attachments panel below.
4. Assessment that demonstrates candidates' knowledge, skills, and dispositions are applied
effectively in practice. IRA standards that could be addressed in this assessment include but are not
limited to 2, 3, 4, and 5. The assessment instrument used to evaluate internships, practicum, or
other clinical experiences should be submitted. (Answer required)
Provide assessment information (items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IV
Assessment 4: Case Study
See Attachments panel below.
5. Assessment that demonstrates and evaluates candidate effects on student learning and
provision of supportive learning environments for student learning. IRA standards that could be
addressed in this assessment include but are not limited to 2, 3, 4, and 5. Examples of assessments
include those based on student work samples, portfolio tasks, case studies, follow-up studies, and
employer surveys. (Answer Required)
Provide assessment information (items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IV
Assessment 5: Clinic Portfolio
See Attachments panel below.
6. IRA standards that could be addressed in this assessment include but are not limited to 2, 3, 4,
and 5. Examples of appropriate assessments include evaluations of field experiences, case studies,
research reports, child studies, action research, portfolio tasks, and follow-up studies. (Answer
required)
Provide assessment information (items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IV
Assessment 6: Inclusive Classroom Project
See Attachments panel below.
7. Additional assessment that addresses IRA standards. Examples of assessments include
evaluations of field experiences, case studies, portfolio tasks, licensure tests not reported in #1, and
follow-up studies.
Provide assessment information (items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IV
Assessment 7: Supplemental Literacy Project
See Attachments panel below.
8. Additional assessment that addresses IRA standards. Examples of assessments include
evaluations of field experiences, case studies, portfolio tasks, licensure tests not reported in #1, and
follow-up studies.
Provide assessment information (items 1-5) as outlined in the directions for Section IV
Assessment 8: Technology Integrated Unit Plan
See Attachments panel below.
SECTION V - USE OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS TO IMPROVE PROGRAM
1. Evidence must be presented in this section that assessment results have been analyzed and
have been or will be used to improve candidate performance and strengthen the program. This
description should not link improvements to individual assessments but, rather, it should
summarize principal findings from the evidence, the faculty's interpretation of those findings, and
changes made in (or planned for) the program as a result. Describe the steps program faculty has
taken to use information from assessments for improvement of both candidate performance and
the program. This information should be organized around (1) content knowledge, (2) professional
and pedagogical knowledge, skill, and dispositions, and (3) student learning. In addition, for each
assessment listed in Section II, describe why or why not the assessment has been changed since the
program was submitted previously.
(Response limited to 24,000 characters)
IRA Program Report – Master of Education: Reading
SECTION V- USE OF ASSESSMENT RESULTS TO IMPROVE PROGRAM
The Master of Education: Reading assessment results have been reviewed by all members of the
Graduate Reading Program at Edinboro University of Pennsylvania. The use of LiveText has afforded
the program faculty to aggregate and analyze the data most effectively and make sound
recommendations for improvement and relevant change. In reviewing the eight (8) assessments, it was
decided to streamline the assessment chart to better reflect the key aspects of each assessment. While
other IRA standards are addressed and aligned within each of the assessment rubrics, those most specific
to that assessment were designated as focus standards to address in this report. Although fewer
assessments were included for each area in the assessment, all IRA standards have been fully addressed
and aligned with the eight assessments.
Content Knowledge
Evidence from the data supports that the candidates in this Master of Education: Reading Program are
well prepared for successful passage of the PRAXIS II exam for licensure as a Reading Specialist.
Informal and formal meetings with candidates affirm that current course offerings and content materials
provide sound support in their preparation for this exam. Plans are to continue to interview completers to
seek their input on preparation and strategies for continued success in this area.
The READ706 Mini-Research Project, Assessment 2, provides strong evidence of content knowledge at
work. This project continues to support candidates with the background knowledge of current reading
theory and knowledge bases. Faculty members have determined the continued need to expand topics of
study to include recent trends in reading and intervention. These topics provide the standard for future
research in courses that follow.
Professional and Pedagogical Knowledge, Skills, and Dispositions
Assessment 3 Professional Development Project, Assessment 7 Supplemental Literacy Strategies for
Content Area Lessons, and Assessment 8 Technology Integration respond to the effective demonstration
of professional and pedagogical knowledge, skills, and dispositions. In review of data provided in this
area, the faculty has determined a need to reconsider Assessment 8 Technology Integration as a primary
assessment for reporting. Since the last submission of this report, all courses have been revisited and
revised to meet most current IRA standards. Results of these revisions are reflected in the revised course
titles and numbers being updated and subsequently changed. Most significant is the change in ELED786
Curriculum to READ 786 Comprehensive Literacy Curriculum: Design and Implementation.
Additionally, a rigorous assessment has been implemented within this course (Study of Studies) which
would be most beneficial to add or substitute for the current Assessment 8. This assessment is currently
in the development stage with plans to pilot it in Spring 2011.
In keeping with the newly proposed 2010 IRA Standards, all courses are being once again revisited and
rubrics for all assessments are being aligned to those standards. Expectations are that updated rubrics
will be used as early as Spring 2011.
Student Learning
The review of Assessments 4 Case Study, 5 Clinic Portfolio, and 6 Inclusive Classroom Project by the
faculty reflect that once again some relevant changes and updates need to occur. Noting the upcoming
IRA Standard 4 Diversity and 5 Literate Environment, the faculty has determined the need to revisit
Assessment 6 to be more research oriented and effectively presented. In addition its revision would
reflect recent trends in the definitions of “all readers” and “struggling readers,” and the roles of the
literacy coach in their Response to Instruction/Intervention (RtII). Faculty in the Graduate Reading
Program are becoming highly cognizant of the RtII process, have engaged in research on the topic,
observed it in practice, and are providing venue for sharing strategies used in the process on our campus
in the spring 2011. This will be shared through our coursework and ultimately will impact how students
are served and learn.
The faculty also concurs with language that appears in the new IRA Standards relative to the role of the
literacy coach:
“The major role of these educators is to provide support to teachers in their instructional efforts and
specifically to help reading professionals provide the differentiated instruction necessary to meet the
needs of all students in the classroom.”
Recognizing the role of the literacy coach, the faculty is continuing to make sure that the clinical
experiences engage the candidates in diverse settings. Of significant importance is providing experiences
that address the specific needs of English learners. A program serving migrant students in neighboring
Erie, Pennsylvania, has been added to the sites used in the clinical experiences.
Finally, the Graduate Reading Program faculty is in the process of research, development, and
construction of a new course and assessment that will address the specific needs of diverse learners. The
course is expected to address new IRA Standards and respond to providing enriched experiences where
candidates can impact diverse student learning and success.
SECTION VI - FOR REVISED REPORTS OR RESPONSE TO CONDITIONS REPORTS ONLY
1. For Revised Reports: Describe what changes or additions have been made to address the
standards that were not met in the original submission. Provide new responses to questions and/or
new documents to verify the changes described in this section. Specific instructions for preparing a
Revised Report are available on the NCATE web site at
http://www.ncate.org/institutions/resourcesNewPgm.asp?ch=90
For Response to Conditions Reports: Describe what changes or additions have been made to
address the conditions cited in the original recognition report. Provide new responses to questions
and/or new documents to verify the changes described in this section. Specific instructions for
preparing a Response to Conditions Report are available on the NCATE web site at
http://www.ncate.org/institutions/resourcesNewPgm.asp?ch=90
(Response limited to 24,000 characters.)
Please click "Next"
This is the end of the report. Please click "Next" to proceed.