Fall 2013
SPED 526: Instruction and Assessment
in Secondary Special Education
Wednesdays 4:40-7:10 pm
Instructor:
Candace Mulcahy, Ph.D.
Office: AB-235
Phone: (607) 777-4169
E-mail: cmulcahy@binghamton.edu
Office Hours: 1:30-3:30 Wednesdays or by
appt
Course Description: This course prepares
discipline-based educators who engage in
reflective decision-making and researchvalidated professional practice that results in
creation of effective instructional programs for
diverse groups of children. Knowledge of
educational goals and assessment strategies are
essential components of reflective practice.
Required Texts:
Archer, A. L., & Hughes, C.A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective and efficient teaching. New York:
The Guilford Press.
Conderman, G., Hedin, L., & Bresnahan, V. (2013). Strategy instruction for middle and secondary
students with mild disabilities: Creating independent learners. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.
Office of Vocation and Educational Services for Individual with Disabilities. (2010). Individualized
Education Programs: Developing high quality plans for students in New York State. Albany,
NY: Author.
(Recommended) American Psychological Association (6th ed). (2010). Publication manual of the
American Psychological Association. Washington, DC: Author.
Weekly readings will be available on Bb.
Web Sites:
CAST: www.cast.org
Common Core State Standards: http://www.corestandards.org/
IRIS Center: http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/index.html
National Center on Secondary Education and Transition: http://www.ncset.org/
NYS Learning Standards and Core Curriculum: http://www.p12.nysed.gov/ciai
Project-Based Learning: http://pbl-online.org/
US Department of Education What Works Clearinghouse: http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/
Webquests: http://webquest.org/index.php; http://www.zunal.com/
Competencies:
The course will involve lecture, discussions, required readings, and a variety of assignments completed
in and out of class. After taking SPED 526, students will be able to:
a. Discuss difficulties students may experience learning content area instruction (CC2K5;
CC2K6);
b. Describe the Common Core and and State Standards for teaching math, English, science or social
studies and assessments (CC7K3; CC8K5);
c. Review components of effective instruction for secondary students with diverse learning needs
(CC4S2; CC4S3; CC4S4);
d. Review planning and delivering instruction for secondary students with learning difficulties
(CC7K2; CC7S1; CC7S5; CC7S10; CC7S11; IGC, Standard 4 Instructional strategies; IGC,
Standard 7 Instructional planning);
e. Develop an instructional unit that includes differentiated instruction
f. Teach a set of lessons using research-based instructional strategies and monitor student
performance (IGC, IGC, Standard 4 Instructional strategies; Standard 7 Instructional planning).
*Council for Exceptional Children (2003). What every special educator must know: The
international standards for the preparation and certification of special education teachers (5th
ed.).
CC= Common Core standards; IGC = Individualized General Curriculum Referenced Standards
Course Requirements:
1. Attend every class on time.
2. Read assigned readings before the class period for which they are assigned.
3. Participate in class discussion.
4. Resume & Assignment List: All students will develop a professional resume, highlighting
experience with children in educational and non-educational settings. The resume should
include: name, address, phone number, email address; current education courses with brief
description; previous school placements, including type of school, setting, level, dates; volunteer
work with children; work experience with children; special skills, talents you bring to the
experience; minimum of two (2) goals for the experience.
In addition, students will develop a list (with short descriptions) of ALL assignments and due
dates (i.e., from every course) that require fieldwork hours.
Students will give the resume and assignment list to their cooperating teacher or administrator at
your first meeting. At the meeting, make sure to review the assignments and due dates.
5. Fieldwork: This course requires fieldwork with student(s) with disabilities. Fieldwork must relate
to the age group for your certification. Fieldwork logs can be found on the SPED Blackboard
organization page, and must be signed by your cooperating teacher or administrator at the end of
the semester. In your fieldwork setting, you will develop and administer at least one lesson
plan, applying at least two of the concepts addressed in class, and reflecting on the
experience.
2
6. Homework: Homework will be assigned for most class sessions. The assignments will be posted
on Blackboard or handed out in class the week before it is due. For some homework, you will
need to access documents, students, or personnel at the school district in which you are working.
Plan accordingly. Homework is due weekly, and will NOT be accepted after the due date. It
is essential to attend class, plan ahead, and to read the assigned readings!
7. Curriculum map: Each pair of students will develop a curriculum map to outline the mini-unit.
The format for the curriculum map will be shared in class.
8. IEP Matrix: Each student will develop an IEP matrix of the goals, accommodations, and
modifications of each student on his/her (or cooperating teacher’s) caseload. The format for the
matrix will be discussed in class.
9. PBL Instructional Mini-Unit: Each student pair will develop an instructional mini-unit aligned
with your curriculum map. The mini-unit should consist of at least 4-6 lessons with completed
lesson plans, corresponding assessment tools, and utilize at least five concepts covered in class
(e.g., co-curricular instruction, technology, self-regulation). The Mini-Unit must be bound
(FedEx/Kinko’s does this inexpensively) prior to turning in.
10. Conference Attendance: Attend a professional conference, workshop, or colloquium (e.g., the
NYS CEC Convention in Melville, NY on 10/24 and 10/25) that focuses on special education
and instruction. You must attend at least a full day equivalent (3-6 sessions). Ideally, you will
attend sessions related to topics we cover in class. Following the attendance, you will write a
reflection paper on the sessions you attended. In the reflection paper, you will discuss how the
topic of the session relates to concepts discussed in class and/or readings, and how to effectively
apply the topic to your own classroom situation. In addition to the reflection, you will turn in the
program, as well as any handouts from the sessions you attended.
3
ASSIGNMENTS AND GRADING
Total Points: 100
A
AB+
B
B-
=
=
=
=
=
95% to 100%
90% to 94%
88 - 89%
84 - 87%
80 - 83%
C+
C
CF
Product
=
=
=
=
77 - 79%
74 - 76%
70 - 73%
0 - 69%
Points
Date Due
Homework
10
Weekly
Fieldwork Lesson Planning, Delivery
& Reflection (w/ assessment)
10
11/27
IEP Matrix
10
10/24
Lesson Plans (4-6)
20
On-going
Assessments (5-8)
10
On-going
Curriculum Map
10
10/3; 12/5
PBL Mini-Unit
20
Conference Reflection
10
12/5
12/12
Grading Procedures
Grades are based on the successful completion of all course requirements in a timely manner. Grades
are based on performance, not effort. Everyone puts forth a great deal of effort during class
experiences. Those who do not put forth a great deal of effort typically do not manage to complete the
experience. Despite the great efforts put forth by all, not all performances are equal. Some students are
exceptional in their performance while others are satisfactory. Your grade is based on your
performance, i.e., your performance in the classroom, your performance on written assignments,
and your ability to display appropriate professional dispositions, per the GSE expectations for
dispositions (http://www2.binghamton.edu/gse/current-students/index.html#prof-dispositions).
Assignments are due at the beginning of class on the date listed in the course syllabus. Assignments
received by the instructor within 24 hours of the original due date/time (i.e., the start of class) can
earn only 1/2 of the total value of the assignment. After that 24 hour period, I will provide feedback
on the assignments but you will have already earned a grade of 0. No “extra credit” will be offered so
please do not ask!
4
STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES
Students who have a documented disability and wish to discuss academic accommodations should
contact Dr. Mulcahy as soon as possible to explore alternative arrangements in completing
assignments or taking exams for this class. Additional assistance also is available through the Office
of Services for Students with Disabilities (SSD) at 777-2686. Their office is at UU-119. The SSD
office makes formal recommendations regarding necessary and appropriate accommodations based
on your specific diagnosed disability. Information about your disability will be treated in a
confidential manner.
ACADEMIC HONESTY
Binghamton University enforces a Code of Academic Honesty. All members of the University
community have the responsibility to maintain and foster a condition and an atmosphere of academic
integrity. Specifically, this requires that all classroom, laboratory, and written work for which a
person claims credit, is in fact that person’s own work. The University Student Handbook publication
has detailed information on academic integrity.
Students assume responsibility for the content and integrity of the academic work they submit.
Students are in violation of academic honesty if they incorporate into their written or oral reports any
unacknowledged published or unpublished or oral material from the work of another (plagiarism); or
if they use, request, or give unauthorized assistance in any academic work (cheating). (GSE
Academic Honesty Policies)
Plagiarism and cheating will not be tolerated in this class. Incidents of either will result in a failing
grade for the assignment in question. Please see me if you have questions concerning what constitutes
cheating or plagiarism.
CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT
The faculty and staff in the Graduate School of Education are committed to serving all enrolled
students. The intention is to create an intellectually stimulating, safe, respectful and enjoyable class
atmosphere. In return, I expect that each of you will honor and respect the opinions and feelings of
your fellow students.
5
COURSE SCHEDULE
Note: This is a proposed schedule, which is subject to change as some lectures/activities may require
more or less class time. Additional course readings may be provided in class or on Bb.
WEEK
DATE
TOPIC
1
8/25
Introductions/Syllabus
Characteristics of Secondary Students with
Special Needs/ Learning Profiles
NYS State Learning Standards and the
Common Core State Standards
LIFE IN THE SOUTHERN TIER
9/4
No Class – Rosh Hashanah
9/11
Readings: 5, 11, 13, 14, 28
Big Ideas in Special Education Practice:
- Differentiated Instruction
- Universal Design for Learning
- IEP Goals
- Accommodations & Modifications
2
3
9/18
4
9/25
ONLINE
CLASS
Instructional Planning, Pt. 1:
- Curriculum Mapping
- Co-Curricular Instruction
- Project-Based Learning, ContextBased Learning
- Integrating Technology
HOMEWORK
CHB: Chap 1
Readings: 10, 16, 25, 27, 30
Websites: Common Core
Standards; NYS Learning
Standards; IRIS Center
NYS IEP
A&H: Chap 8
CHB: Skim Assessment Chaps
Readings: 19, 24 (pp.129-151),
33
Assessment for Instruction:
A&H: Chap 3, 4
- Classroom Based Assessment
Readings: 18
(CBA)
- Formative/Summative Assessment
- Progress Monitoring
Instructional Planning, Pt 2:
- Unit Development
- SMARTER Planning
A&H: Chap 1, 2
Readings: 29
Camtasia: Lesson Plan Format
10/9
Instructional Planning, Pt 3:
- Lesson Development and
Alignment
- Explicit Instruction & StudentDirected Activities
A&H: Chap 5, 6, 7
Readings: 23, 36
- IRIS MODULE: PALS: A
Reading Strategy for High
School
10/16
Instructional Delivery
- Grouping for Instruction
LP/ASSESSMENT PEER REVIEW 1
CHB: Chap 1
Readings: 1, 21
Current Practice Alert: SRSD
5
10/2
Curriculum
Map DUE
6
7
6
WEEK
DATE
8
10/23
Instructional Strategies:
Writing Strategies
- SRSD
Readings: 7, 32, 40
Adolescent Literacy Fact
Sheet
- IRIS MODULE: CSR: A
Reading Comprehension
Strategy
9
10/30
Instructional Strategies:
Reading Strategies
Readings: 12, 20, 31
Concrete-RepresentationalAbstract Instructional
Approach
Instructional Strategies:
Mathematics/Content Area Strategies
- CRA
- Anchored Instruction
Bring to class a reading
selection from your mini-unit
(electronic copy preferable)
IEP Matrix
Due
10
11/6
TOPIC
HOMEWORK
LP/ASSESSMENT PEER REVIEW 2
11
11/13
Readability: Adapting Reading Levels
Readings: 6, 9, 34, 38, 39
12
11/20
Fieldwork
Lesson Due
Law and Policy
- IDEA, NCLB, NYS Regs
- RTI at the Secondary Level.
IN-CLASS WORK SESSION
Readings: 4, 8, 26, 35
13
11/27
NO CLASS - THANKSGIVING
12/4
Characteristics of Effective Secondary
Mini-Unit Due
14
Special Educators
Readings: 22, 37
Websites: What Works
Clearinghouse
Evidence-Based Practice
- What Works Clearinghouse
Conference
Fidelity
of Implementation
Reflection Due
12/11
WOOHOO! We made it!
Have a great winter break!
Note: This schedule is approximate. Activities and lecture topics are subject to change, depending on availability of
resources and scheduling.
7
Readings
(1) Baker, S.K., Chard, D.J., Ketterlin-Geller, L.R., Apichatabutra, C., Doabler, C. (2009). Teaching
writing to at-risk students: The quality of evidence for self-regulated strategy development.
Exceptional Children, 75(3), 303-318.
(2) Banda, D.R., & Therrien, W.J. (2008). A teacher’s guide to meta-analysis. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 41(2), 66-71.
(3) Blum, R.W. (2005). A case for school. Educational Leadership, 62(7), 16-20.
(4) Brownell, M.T., Bishop, A.G., Gersten, R., Klingner, J.K., Penfield, R.D., Dimino, J., Haager, D.,
Menon, S., Sindelar, P.T. (2009). The role of domain expertise in beginning special
education teacher quality. Exceptional Children, 75(4), 391-411.
(5) Childre, A., Sands, J.R., & Pope, S.T. (2009). Backward design. Teaching Exceptional Children,
41(5), 6-14.
(6) Darling-Hammond, L. (1999). State teaching policies and student achievement. Teaching Quality
Policy Briefs, 2. Seattle: Center for the Study of Teaching and Policy.
(7) Edmonds, M.S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K.K., & Schnakenberg,
J.W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension
outcomes for older struggling readers.
(8) Eisenman, L.T., Pleet, A.M., Wandry, D., & McGinley, V. (2011). Voices of special education
teachers in an inclusive high school: Redefining responsibilities. Remedial and Special
Education, 32(2), 91-104.
(9) Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Compton, D.L. (2010). Rethinking response to intervention at middle and
high school. School Psychology Review, 39(1), 22-28.
(10) Hall, T., Strangman, N., Meyer, A. (2011). Differentiated instruction and implications for UDL
implementation. NCAC Effective Classroom Practices. Washington, DC: National Center on
Accessing the General Curriculum.
(11) Hernandez-Ramos, P., & De La Paz, S. (2009). Learning history in middle school by designing
multimedia in a project-based learning experience. Journal of Research on Technology in
Education, 42(2), 151-173.
(12) Hudson, P., Miller, S.P., & Butler, F. (2006). Adapting and merging explicit instruction within
reform based mathematics classrooms. American Secondary Education, 35(1), 19-32.
(13) Jitendra, A.K., Edwards, L.L., Choutka, C.M., & Treadway, P.S. (2002). A collaborative approach
to planning in the content areas for students with learning disabilities: Accessing the general
curriculum. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(4), 252-267.
(14) Koppang, A. (2004). Curriculum mapping: Building collaboration and communication.
Intervention in School and Clinic, 39(3), 154-161.
8
(15) Kortering, L.J., & Christenson, S. (2009). Engaging students in school and learning: The real deal
for school completion. Exceptionality, 17, 5-15.
(16) Kortering, L.J., McClannon, T.W., & Braziel, P.M. (2008). Universal design for learning: A look at
what algebra and biology students with and without high incidence conditions are saying.
Remedial and Special Education, 29(6), 352-363.
(17) Landrum, T.J., & McDuffie, K.A. (2010). Learning styles in the age of differentiated instruction.
Exceptionality, 18, 6-17.
(18) Lenz, K., & Adams, G. (2006). Planning practices that optimize curriculum access. In Deshler,
D.D., & Schumaker, J.B. (Eds.), Teaching Adolescents with Disabilities: Accessing the
General Education Curriculum. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
(19) McTighe, J., O’Connor, K. (2005). Seven practices for effective learning. Educational Leadership,
63(3), 10-17.
(20) Maccini, P., & Gagnon, J.C. (2000). Accessing the general education math curriculum for
secondary students with high-incidence disabilities. Focus on Exceptional Children, 40(8), 132.
(21) Mason, L.H., Kubina, R.M., & Taft, R.J. (2011). Developing quick writing skills of middle school
students with disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 44(4), 205-220.
(22) Mastropieri, M.A., Berkeley, S., Scruggs, T.E., & Marshak, L. (2008). Improving content-area
instruction using evidence-based practices. Insights on Learning Disabilities, 5(1), 73-88.
(23) Mastropieri, M.A., Scruggs, T.E., Norland, J.J., Berkeley, S., McDuffie, K., Halloran-Tornquist,
E.,Connors, N. (2006). Differentiated curriculum enhancement in inclusive middle school
science: Effects on classroom and high-stakes tests. The Journal of Special Education, 40(3),
130-137.
(24) Meese, R.L. (2001). Assessing student progress. In Teaching Learners with Mild Disabilities, pp.
129-161. Stamford, CT: Wadsworth.
(25) Meo, G. (2008). Curriculum planning for all learners: Applying Universal Design for Learning
(UDL) to a high school reading comprehension program. Preventing School Failure, 52(2),
21-30.
(26) Moin, L.J., Magiera, K., & Zigmund, N. (2009). Instructional activities and group work in the US
inclusive high school co-taught science class. International Journal of Science and
Mathematics Education, 7, 677-697.
(27) Nolet, V., & McLaughlin, M.J. (2005). A decision-making process for creating IEPs that lead to
curriculum access. In Accessing the General Curriculum: Including Students with
Disabilities in Standards-Based Reform, pp. 92-109, Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin..
(28) Nolet, V., & McLaughlin, M.J. (2005). The nature of curriculum. In Accessing the General
Curriculum: Including Students with Disabilities in Standards-Based Reform, pp.16-30,
9
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
(29) Price, K.M., & Nelson, K.L. (2007). Lessons versus activities. In Planning Effective Instruction:
Diversity Responsive Methods and Management (3rd ed.), pp. 108-113. Belmont, CA:
Thomson Wadsworth.
(30) Price, K.M., & Nelson, K.L. (2007). Writing objectives. In Planning Effective Instruction: Diversity
Responsive Methods and Management (3rd ed.), pp. 12-26. Belmont, CA: Thomson
Wadsworth.
(31) Reith, H.J., Bryant, D.P., Kinzer, C.K., Colburn, L.K., Hur, S., Hartman, P., & Choi, H.S. (2003).
An analysis of the impact of anchored instruction on teaching and learning activities in two
ninth-grade language arts classes. Remedial and Special Education, 24(3), 173-184.
(32) Reschly, A.L. (2010). Reading and school completion: Critical connections and Matthew effects.
Reading & Writing Quarterly, 26, 67-90.
(33) Roskos, K., & Neuman, S.B. (2012). Formative assessment. The Reading Teacher, 65(8), 534-538.
(34) Sansosti, F.J., Goss, S., Noltemeyer, A. (2011). Perspectives of special education directors on
response to intervention in secondary schools. Contemporary School Psychology, 15, 9-20.
(35) Scruggs, T.E., Mastropieri, M.A., Berkeley, S., & Graetz, J.E. (2010). Do special education
interventions improve learning of secondary content? A meta-analysis. Remedial and Special
Education, 31(6), 437-449.
(36) Stenhoff, D.M., & Lignugaris/Kraft, B. (2007). A review of the effects of peer tutoring on students
with mild disabilities in secondary settings. Exceptional Children, 74(1), 8-30.
(37) Stodden, R.A., Galloway, L.M., Stodden, N.J. (2003). Secondary school curricula issues: Impact on
postsecondary students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 70(1), 9-25.
(38) Vaughn, S., & Fletcher, J.M. (2010). Thoughts on rethinking response to intervention with
secondary students. School Psychology Review, 39(2), 296-299.
(39) Vaughn, S., Cirino, P.T., Wanzek, J., Wexler, J., Fletcher, J.M., Denton, C.D., Barth, A., Romain,
M., & Francis, D.J. (2010). Response to intervention for middle school students with reading
difficulties: Effects of a primary and secondary intervention. School Psychology Review,
39(1), 3-21.
(40) Vaughn, S., Klingner, J.K., Swanson, E.A., Boardman, A.G., Roberts, G., Mohammed, S.S., &
Stillman-Spisak, S.J. (2011). Efficacy of collaborative strategic reading with middle school
students. American Education Research Journal, 48(4), 938-964.
** Other readings may be assigned at the discretion of the instructor.
10