KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION, Cover Sheet (10/02/2002) Course Number/Program Name EDRD 7715 Department Secondary and Middle Grades Education Degree Title (if applicable) EdS/EdD Proposed Effective Date 2006 Check one or more of the following and complete the appropriate sections: x New Course Proposal Course Title Change Course Number Change Course Credit Change Course Prerequisite Change Course Description Change Sections to be Completed II, III, IV, V, VII I, II, III I, II, III I, II, III I, II, III I, II, III Notes: If proposed changes to an existing course are substantial (credit hours, title, and description), a new course with a new number should be proposed. A new Course Proposal (Sections II, III, IV, V, VII) is required for each new course proposed as part of a new program. Current catalog information (Section I) is required for each existing course incorporated into the program. Minor changes to a course can use the simplified E-Z Course Change Form. Submitted by: Faculty Member Approved _____ Date Not Approved Department Curriculum Committee Date Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Not Approved Department Chair Date School Curriculum Committee Date School Dean Date GPCC Chair Date Dean, Graduate Studies Date Not Approved Not Approved Not Approved Not Approved Not Approved Vice President for Academic Affairs Date Approved Not Approved President Date KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COURSE/CONCENTRATION/PROGRAM CHANGE I. Current Information (Fill in for changes) Page Number in Current Catalog Course Prefix and Number Course Title Credit Hours Prerequisites Description (or Current Degree Requirements) II. Proposed Information (Fill in for changes and new courses) Course Prefix and Number EDRD 7715 Course Title __Reading Theory and Application_ Credit Hours 3-0-3 Prerequisites; Admission to graduate studies Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements) An advanced study of the socio-psycholinguistic foundations of reading and writing. This course examines theories of language development and reading acquisition. Candidates will study scientifically-based research in the areas of phonemic awareness, word identification, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension and motivation. This course also explores historical perspectives of reading and reading research and a wide range of instructional practices and curriculum materials that meet the needs of diverse learners at all grade levels. III. Justification Mastery of reading skills is basic to successful learning in every school subject. Teachers can further their training by adding an endorsement in reading to their teaching certificates. Additionally, a reading endorsement will faciliate teacher acquisition of skills and competencies needed to help students read and understand content material; it will also aid teachers in identifying reading problems, providing required interventions, and assisting all students in improving reading skills. A reading endorsement will provide the incentive, as well as the opportunity, for teachers to become effective reading teachers and will help them meet state mandates for highly qualified teachers of reading. In this course teachers will acquire a background in reading theory/research and terminology used in discussing language/reading development. They will develop an understanding of the sociological, psychological, and linguistical factors that underpin reading acquisition and begin exploring a wide array of curricula and instructional practices and materials that meet the needs of a diverse population of adolescent learners. After taking this course, teachers will have a stronger understanding of the reading process including the five dimensions of reading (i.e., phonics, phonemic awareness, fluency, vocabulary, & comprehension). IV. Additional Information (for New Courses only) Instructor: Various Texts: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N. (eds.). Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.). Newark, DE: IRA. And the following websites I Teach; I Learn www.iteachilearn.com Bilingual Books for Kids: www.bilingualbooks.com NCTE: http://www.ncte.org IRA: www.readingonline.org, www.reading.org www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~dkbrown/index.htmll http://teacher.scholastic.com http://suu.edu/faculty/lundd/readingsite/readingresources http://www.sedl.org/reading http://readwritethink.org http://reading.indiana.edu http://teachers.henrico.k12.va.us/Specialist/fanceslively/reading.htm http://www.sedl.org/reading/framework/assessment.htm http://www.balancedreading.com http://www.ops.org/reading/secondarystrat1.htm http://www.literacy.uconn.edu/compre.htm http://www.literacymatters.org/adlit/intro.htm http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/612/Reading/Reading%20strategies/inferentialreading.htm Prerequisites: Admission to graduate studies Objectives: Course Objectives Candidate Performance Instrument (CPI) NCATE IRA Reading Standards Demonstrate knowledge of psychological, sociological, and linguistic foundations of reading and writing processes and instruction. Demonstrate knowledge of reading research and histories of reading. Proficiency 1: Subject Matter Experts Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 1.1 Proficiency 1: Subject Matter Experts Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 1.2 Demonstrate knowledge of language development and reading acquisition and the variations related to cultural and linguistic diversity. Proficiency 1: Subject Matter Experts Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 4: Diversity Standard 1.3 Demonstrate knowledge of the major components of reading (phonemic awareness, word identification and phonics, Proficiency 1: Subject Matter Experts Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 1.4 NCTE Professional Standards for the ELA Standard 3.7 Evidence WebCT Discussions Portfolio Point-Counterpoint Reading Log Reading Process Project Literacy Profile Portfolio WebCT Discussions Point-Counterpoint Reading Log Theoretical Model of Reading Paper Reading Process Project Portfolio WebCT Discussions Point-Counterpoint Reading Log Theoretical Model of Reading Paper Literacy Profile Theoretical Model of Reading Paper Reading Log Portfolio WebCT Discussions vocabulary and background knowledge, fluency, comprehension strategies, and motivation) and how they are integrated in fluent reading. Use instructional grouping options (individual, smallgroup, whole-class, and computer-based) as appropriate for accomplishing given purposes. Use a wide range of instructional practices, approaches, and methods, including technology-based practices, for learners at different stages of development and from differing cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Use a wide range of curriculum materials in effective reading instruction for learners at different stages of reading and writing development and from differing cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Display positive dispositions related to reading and the teaching of reading. Point-Counterpoint Reading Process Project Proficiency 2: Facilitators of Learning Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 2.1 Standard 3.3.2 Portfolio Literacy Profile Proficiency 2: Facilitators of Learning Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 2.2 Standard 3.3.2 Portfolio Point-Counterpoint Literacy Profile Proficiency 2: Facilitators of Learning Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 2.3 Standard 3.3.2 3.6.3 Portfolio Literacy Profile Proficiency 3: Collaborative Professionals Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 5.1 Standard WebCT Discussions Reading Log Theoretical Model of Reading Paper Reading Process Project 4.0 Instructional Method: Small group, whole class discussion, seminar, workshop, lecture Method of Evaluation: Point-Counterpoint. (10%): Candidates will choose one of the five dimensions of reading and examine arguments for and against the findings of the National Reading Panel as well as recent reform stemming from the Panel findings. Research for Point-Counterpoint should include at least two scholarly sources (in addition to course readings) for each position. A concluding statement should discuss implications of the findings for content area reading instruction as well as meeting the needs of diverse students. Synthesis of findings will be written as a formal paper (5-7) pages following APA (5th edition) guidelines using 12 pt. font and doublespaced. Reading Log & Theoretical Model of Reading Paper. (10%): Candidates will maintain a reading log (reflection on all course readings) throughout the semester. These reflections will serve as a basis for a theoretical model of reading paper. This paper will synthesize and reflect upon course readings and will take into account the importance of respecting learners of all ages (7-8 pp. , 5th edition APA guidelines and 12 pt. font, doublespaced.) Literacy Profile. (35%): Candidates will develop one literacy story/profile of a child and provide a “frame” for which it connects to larger issues in literacy instruction. Candidates should consider the child’s language development, interests and attitudes toward reading; cultural, political, economic, and social factors influencing literacy development; and instructional strategies that will meet the needs of this particular student. Resource Critiques (10%): Candidates will evaluate 12 professional resources for teaching reading. Resources may include reading programs, software, professional readings, videos, etc. Three resources should focus on emergent readers, 3 on upper elementary readers, 3 on middle school readers, and 3 on high school students. Resources should also focus on ways to meet the reading needs of a diverse population of readers (e.g. ESOL, special needs, etc.). Reading Process Project. (20%): Candidates will develop a tool for use in explaining the reading process to parents, fellow teachers, or others. This tool may be a short professional development activity, a workshop presentation, a website, a pamphlet, a video, or any other product that would successfully communicate the reading process. WebCT Discussions. (5%): Throughout this course, you will be asked to reflect on the readings and to post your reflections on the class WebCT discussion board. This activity provides us with the opportunity to share thoughts and ideas with each other, to learn from and about other’s perspectives, and to allow time for personal reflection. The focuses of the prompts are designed to ensure that your attention is drawn to key elements in the readings and to encourage reflection on aspects that I consider important to your understanding of the content. Full credit is given to responses that incorporate reflection, address all components of the prompt(s), and are posted by the assigned date. Portfolio. (10%): In this class, you will begin developing your online portfolio in which you illustrate your growth and expertise as a reading teacher. Within this portfolio, you will compile evidence that illustrates you have met the goals and objectives of the reading endorsement program (see table with objectives, IRA Standards and CPI and the section on the portfolio narrative). At the end of the reading endorsement, you will write a narrative as a final reflection of your experience. I will provide further details throughout the course. V. Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only) Funding is addressed in the comprehensive proposal for the umbrella EdD degree Resource Amount Faculty Other Personnel Equipment Supplies Travel New Books New Journals Other (Specify) TOTAL Funding Required Beyond Normal Departmental Growth VI. COURSE MASTER FORM This form will be completed by the requesting department and will be sent to the Office of the Registrar once the course has been approved by the Office of the President. The form is required for all new courses. DISCIPLINE COURSE NUMBER COURSE TITLE FOR LABEL (Note: Limit 16 spaces) CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS Approval, Effective Term Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U) If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas? Learning Support Programs courses which are required as prerequisites Adolescent Education EDRD 7715 Rdg Theory & App 3-0-3 Fall 2006 Regular APPROVED: ________________________________________________ Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __ VII Attach Syllabus EDRD 7715 KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY BAGWELL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION READING ENDORSEMENT Fall 2006 I. COURSE NUMBER/SECTION: EDRD 7715 COURSE TITLE: Theory and Pedagogy in the Study of Reading II. INSTRUCTOR: Name: Office: Office Phone: E-mail: Office Hours: Dr. Pam B. Cole Kennesaw Hall 1004 770.423.6351 pcole@kennesaw.edu TBD III. CLASS MEETING: M XXPM-XXPM, KH XXXX IV. TEXT(S): National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: an evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups (NIH Publication No. 00-4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office. Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N. (eds.). Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.). Newark, DE: IRA. The following websites will get you started with some class research: I Teach; I Learn www.iteachilearn.com Bilingual Books for Kids: www.bilingualbooks.com NCTE: http://www.ncte.org IRA: www.readingonline.org, www.reading.org www.acs.ucalgary.ca/~dkbrown/index.htmll http://teacher.scholastic.com http://suu.edu/faculty/lundd/readingsite/readingresources http://www.sedl.org/reading http://readwritethink.org http://reading.indiana.edu http://teachers.henrico.k12.va.us/Specialist/fanceslively/reading.htm http://www.sedl.org/reading/framework/assessment.htm http://www.balancedreading.com http://www.ops.org/reading/secondarystrat1.htm http://www.literacy.uconn.edu/compre.htm http://www.literacymatters.org/adlit/intro.htm http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/instruction/ela/6-12/Reading/Reading%20strategies/inferentialreading.htm V. CATALOG DESCRIPTION: An advanced study of the socio-psycholinguistic foundations of reading and writing. This course examines theories of language development and reading acquisition. Candidates will study scientificallybased research in the areas of phonemic awareness, word identification, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension and motivation. This course also explores historical perspectives of reading and reading research and a wide range of instructional practices and curriculum materials that meet the needs of diverse learners at all grade levels. VI. PURPOSE/RATIONALE: Mastery of reading skills is basic to successful learning in every school subject. Teachers can further their training by adding an endorsement in reading to their teaching certificates. Additionally, a reading endorsement will faciliate teacher acquisition of skills and competencies needed to help students read and understand content material; it will also aid teachers in identifying reading problems, providing required interventions, and assisting all students in improving reading skills. A reading endorsement will provide the incentive, as well as the opportunity, for teachers to become effective reading teachers and will help them meet state mandates for highly qualified teachers of reading. In this course teachers will acquire a background in reading theory/research and terminology used in discussing language/reading development. They will develop an understanding of the sociological, psychological, and linguistical factors that underpin reading acquisition and begin exploring a wide array of curricula and instructional practices and materials that meet the needs of a diverse population of adolescent learners. After taking this course, teachers will have a stronger understanding of the reading process including the five dimensions of reading (i.e., phonics, phonemic awareness, fluency, vocabulary, & comprehension). Conceptional Framework Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching and Learning The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and leaders who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and who enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace the notion that teaching and learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can all students construct meaning and reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates are facilitators of the teaching and learning process. Finally, the PTEU recognizes, values and demonstrates collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large. Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, the public and private schools, parents and other professional partners, the PTEU meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of learning. The graduates of advanced programs at Kennesaw State University, in addition to being effective classroom teachers, also develop expertise as effective teacher leaders who are self-directed, value a spirit of inquiry, and facilitate learning in all students; they 1. Are committed to students and their learning. 2. Know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students. 3. Are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning. 4. Think systematically about their practice and learn from experience. 5. Are members of learning communities. Professional Portfolio Narrative: A required element in each portfolio for the reading endorsement is the portfolio narrative. The purpose of the portfolio narrative is twofold: 1) to ensure that every candidate reflects on each of the proficiencies on the CPI with regard to what evidence the candidate has selected for his/her portfolio; 2) to ensure that every candidate reflects on each of the IRA standards for reading research and their understanding of the five dimensions of reading (i.e., phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, & comprehension) as identified by the National Reading Panel (NRP). In your portfolio, you need to include a narrative, which includes descriptive, analytic and reflective writing in which you reflect on each CPI proficiency, IRA standard, and the 5 dimensions of reading and how you make the case that the evidence you have selected in your portfolio supports your growth in these areas. The narrative should be comprehensive, documenting scientfically research-based best practices. Field Experiences: While completing your graduate program (reading endorsement) at Kennesaw State University, you are required to be involved in a variety of leadership and school-based activities directed at the improvement of teaching and learning. Appropriate activities may include, but are not limited to, attending and presenting at professional conferences, actively serving on or chairing school-based committees, attending PTA/school board meetings, leading or presenting professional development activities at the school or district level, and participating in education-related community events. As you continue your educational experiences, you are encouraged to explore every opportunity to learn by doing. Knowledge Base: Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases: preservice, induction, in-service, renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg (1996) believes that the concept of expertise is central to analyzing the teaching-learning process, the teacher education faculty at KSU believes that the concept of expertise is central to preparing effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during the continuum phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward becoming Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that expertise is not an end-state but a process of continued development. This course is designed for graduate candidates who are completing a program of study leading to a reading endorsement. The knowledge base for this course is reflected in the textual readings, references, objectives, assignments and in-class activities. Program candidates will have an opportunity to demonstrate pedagogical knowledge and skills related to student needs and motivation, various family and community literacies and the process of active learning. The professional learning facilitator: Demonstrates the knowledge of content required to facilitate learning. Demonstrates the knowledge of students needed to facilitate learning. Demonstrates the knowledge of standards and best pedagogical practices to facilitate learning. Demonstrates skill in creating a facilitative learning environment. Demonstrates skill in creating facilitative learning experiences. Demonstrates professionalism. Has students who are successful learners. Use of Technology: Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission. Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master teacher preparation program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve student learning and meet Georgia Technology Standards for educators. Candidates in this course will explore and use instructional media to assist teaching. They will master productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials and create WWW resources. Diversity Statement: A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs of the different learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as well as an understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective instruction and assessment within multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is raising candidate awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second element is to cause candidates to explore how multiple attributes of multicultural populations influence decisions in employing specific methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are age, disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race, religion, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. An emphasis on cognitive style differences provides a background for the consideration of cultural context. Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons defined as disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of services are available to support students with disabilities within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students must visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (ext. 6443) and develop an individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required. Please be aware there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State University that address each of the multicultural variables outlined above. VII. COURSE GOALS/OBJECTIVES: The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) prepares learning facilitators who understand their disciplines and principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply these understandings to making instructional decisions that foster the success of all learners. The following grid aligns course objectives with the PTEU Proficiency (documented in the Candidate Performance Instrument--CPI), NCATE, IRA Professional Reading Standards and NCTE Professional Standards for the English Language Arts: Course Objectives Candidate NCATE IRA NCTE Evidence Performance Instrument (CPI) Reading Standards Professional Standards for the ELA Demonstrate knowledge of psychological, sociological, and linguistic foundations of reading and writing processes and instruction. Demonstrate knowledge of reading research and histories of reading. Proficiency 1: Subject Matter Experts Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 1.1 Proficiency 1: Subject Matter Experts Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 1.2 Demonstrate knowledge of language development and reading acquisition and the variations related to cultural and linguistic diversity. Proficiency 1: Subject Matter Experts Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 4: Diversity Standard 1.3 Demonstrate knowledge of the major components of reading (phonemic awareness, word identification and phonics, vocabulary and background knowledge, fluency, comprehension strategies, and motivation) and how they are integrated in fluent reading. Use instructional grouping options (individual, smallgroup, whole-class, and computer-based) as appropriate for accomplishing given purposes. Use a wide range of instructional practices, approaches, and methods, including technology-based practices, for learners at different stages of development and from differing cultural and linguistic backgrounds. Use a wide range of curriculum materials in effective reading instruction for learners at different stages of reading and writing development and from differing cultural and linguistic Proficiency 1: Subject Matter Experts Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 1.4 Proficiency 2: Facilitators of Learning Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 2.1 Standard 3.3.2 Portfolio Literacy Profile Proficiency 2: Facilitators of Learning Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 2.2 Standard 3.3.2 Portfolio Point-Counterpoint Literacy Profile Proficiency 2: Facilitators of Learning Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 2.3 Standard 3.3.2 3.6.3 Portfolio Literacy Profile Standard 3.7 WebCT Discussions Portfolio Point-Counterpoint Reading Log Reading Process Project Literacy Profile Portfolio WebCT Discussions Point-Counterpoint Reading Log Theoretical Model of Reading Paper Reading Process Project Portfolio WebCT Discussions Point-Counterpoint Reading Log Theoretical Model of Reading Paper Literacy Profile Theoretical Model of Reading Paper Reading Log Portfolio WebCT Discussions Point-Counterpoint Reading Process Project backgrounds. Display positive dispositions related to reading and the teaching of reading. Proficiency 3: Collaborative Professionals Standard 1: Candidate Knowledge, Skills & Dispositions Standard 5.1 Standard 4.0 WebCT Discussions Reading Log Theoretical Model of Reading Paper Reading Process Project VIII. COURSE REQUIREMENTS/ASSIGNMENTS: Point-Counterpoint. (10%): Candidates will choose one of the five dimensions of reading and examine arguments for and against the findings of the National Reading Panel as well as recent reform stemming from the Panel findings. Research for Point-Counterpoint should include at least two scholarly sources (in addition to course readings) for each position. A concluding statement should discuss implications of the findings for content area reading instruction as well as meeting the needs of diverse students. Synthesis of findings will be written as a formal paper (5-7) pages following APA (5th edition) guidelines using 12 pt. font and doublespaced. Reading Log & Theoretical Model of Reading Paper. (10%): Candidates will maintain a reading log (reflection on all course readings) throughout the semester. These reflections will serve as a basis for a theoretical model of reading paper. This paper will synthesize and reflect upon course readings and will take into account the importance of respecting learners of all ages (7-8 pp. , 5th edition APA guidelines and 12 pt. font, doublespaced.) Literacy Profile. (35%): Candidates will develop one literacy story/profile of a child and provide a “frame” for which it connects to larger issues in literacy instruction. Candidates should consider the child’s language development, interests and attitudes toward reading; cultural, political, economic, and social factors influencing literacy development; and instructional strategies that will meet the needs of this particular student. Resource Critiques (10%): Candidates will evaluate 12 professional resources for teaching reading. Resources may include reading programs, software, professional readings, videos, etc. Three resources should focus on emergent readers, 3 on upper elementary readers, 3 on middle school readers, and 3 on high school students. Resources should also focus on ways to meet the reading needs of a diverse population of readers (e.g. ESOL, special needs, etc.). Reading Process Project. (20%): Candidates will develop a tool for use in explaining the reading process to parents, fellow teachers, or others. This tool may be a short professional development activity, a workshop presentation, a website, a pamphlet, a video, or any other product that would successfully communicate the reading process. WebCT Discussions. (5%): Throughout this course, you will be asked to reflect on the readings and to post your reflections on the class WebCT discussion board. This activity provides us with the opportunity to share thoughts and ideas with each other, to learn from and about other’s perspectives, and to allow time for personal reflection. The focuses of the prompts are designed to ensure that your attention is drawn to key elements in the readings and to encourage reflection on aspects that I consider important to your understanding of the content. Full credit is given to responses that incorporate reflection, address all components of the prompt(s), and are posted by the assigned date. Portfolio. (10%): In this class, you will begin developing your online portfolio in which you illustrate your growth and expertise as a reading teacher. Within this portfolio, you will compile evidence that illustrates you have met the goals and objectives of the reading endorsement program (see table with objectives, IRA Standards and CPI and the section on the portfolio narrative). At the end of the reading endorsement, you will write a narrative as a final reflection of your experience. I will provide further details throughout the course. IX. Evaluation and Grading: A = 90 – 100% B = 80 – 89% C = 70 – 79% D = 60 – 69% Late Work I will accept late work. However, I do deduct points from all late work. No exceptions. I consider work late if it is not handed in during the assigned class time. Each day an assignment is late, the activity will receive a 25% grade reduction per day. (If an assignment is due on Tuesday and you turn it in on Thursday, the assignment is two days late.) I do count Saturday and Sunday. Should you turn in work on the day of class but after the class is over, the work is one day late. I cannot be responsible for work placed under my door, in my mailbox, or via email, etc., unless we have a mutual arrangement. I will consider incompletes for extenuating circumstances. I expect all work to be turned in on time; being absent from class will not serve as an adequate reason for failing to submit work in a timely manner or for being prepared for class. Standards: When submitting work, please remember the following: secure single sheets of paper—DO NOT dogear or turn in loose sheets type/word process all assignments (crisp, clear printout) no report covers or plastic sleeves along with your name, please include the date and course # on work All work should be edited well. Points will be deducted from all work that does not meet professioinal standards. In some cases, I may return the work without a grade. X. ACADEMIC INTEGRITY: Every KSU student is responsible for upholding the provisions of the Student Code of Conduct, as published in the Undergraduate and Graduate Catalogs. Section II of the Student Code of Conduct addresses the University's policy on academic honesty, including provisions regarding plagiarism and cheating, unauthorized access to University materials, misrepresentation/falsification of University records or academic work,malicious removal, retention, or destruction of library materials, malicious/intentional misuse of computer facilities and/or services, and misuse of student identification cards. Incidents of alleged academic misconduct will be handled through the established procedures of the University Judiciary Program, which includes either an "informal" resolution by a faculty member, resulting in a grade adjustment, or a formal hearing procedure, which may subject a student to the Code of Conduct's minimum one semester suspension requirement. XI. ATTENDANCE POLICY: The expectations for attending class are in accordance with the Undergraduate Catalogue. All students are expected to attend classes in accordance with the scheduled time of the course. Should you be absent, you are responsible for making up the work missed. In-class activities may not be made up. XII. COURSE OUTLINE: What follows is a tentative schedule (subject to change with notice). I have indicated the dates that readings from your text are due. I may also assign other readings which are are NOT indicated in the reading schedule. I prefer to leave a bit of reading open until we see your needs and interests. I will announce them as need arises. Week 1 Introduction/Syllabus Perspectives on Reading Research and Practice: Past and Present Week 2 Language and Cognition in Sociocultural Contexts Literacy & Identity (e.g. ESOL, Cultural Perspectives) Week 3 Foundations of Literacy Development Emergent Literacy Delayed and Disabled Readers Week 4 Foundations of Literacy Development continued From Word Perception to Phonics, and Beyond Phonemic Awareness Week 5 Comprehension Development from Words to Worlds Vocabulary Week 6 Comprehension Development continued Comprehension and Culture Developing Fluency Week 7 Extending Comprehension through Metacognition Week 8 Instructional Effects on Literacy Development Week 9 Models of Reading/Writing Processes: Cognitive-Processing Models Week 10 Models of Reading/Writing Processes: Dual Coding Model Transactional Model Individual-Environmetal Model of Writing Week 11 Models of Reading/Writing Processes: Attitude-Influence Model Sociocognitive Model Week 12 Context, Word Identification, and Constructing Meaning Week 13 At-risk learners Week 14 Teaching for Second Language Learners Week 15 New Horizons in Literacy Instruction XIII. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY: Angelillo, J. (2003). Writing about reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Brozo, W., & Simpson, M. (1995). Readers, teachers, learners (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Burke, J. (2002). Reading reminders: Tools, tips, and techniques. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook. Burkhardt, R. (2003). Writing for real. Westerville, OH: NMSA. Calkins, L. (2001). The art of teaching reading. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Campbell, R. (2004). Phonics naturally, reading and writing for real purposes. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Cole, A. D. (2004). When reading begins: The teacher's role in decoding, comprehension, and fluency. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Cullinan, B. (1992). Read to me: Raising kids who love to read. New York: Scholastic. Cullinan, B., & Galda, L. (1994). Literature and the child. San Diego: Harcourt Brace. Dahl, K., Scharer, P., Lawson, L., & Grogan, P. (2001). Rethinking phonics: Making the best teaching decisions. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Davenport, M. R. (2002). Miscues not mistakes: Reading assessment in the classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Dornan, R., Rosen, L., & Wilson, M. (1997). Multiple voices, multiple texts: Reading in the secondary content areas. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook. Dudley-Marling, C., & Paugh, P. (2004). A classroom teacher's guide to struggling readers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Eldredge, J. L. (2005). Teaching decoding: Why and how. Newark, DE: IRA. Ellery, V. (2005). Creating strategic readers. Newark, DE: IRA. Farris, P., Fuhler, C., & Walther, M. (2004). Teaching reading: A balanced approach for today’s classrooms. Boston: McGraw-Hill. Flippo, R. F. (2003). Assessing readers qualitative diagnosis and instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Flood, J. (2005). Literacy development of students in urban schools: Newark, DE: IRA. Fox, B. (2004). Word identification strategies: Phonics from a new perspective. Newark, DE: IRA. Freedman, D. E., & Freedman, Y. S. (2004). Essential linguistics: What you need to know to teach reading, ESL, spelling, phonics, grammar. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Gallis, K. (1994). How children talk, write, draw, dance, and sing their understanding of the world. New York: Teachers College Press. Goodman, K. (1996). On reading: A common-sense look at the nature of language and the science of reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Goodman, Y. M. , & Owocki, G. (2002). Kidwatching: Documenting children's literacy development. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Graves, M. (2001). Teaching reading in the 21st century. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Gunning, T. G. (1996). Creating reading instruction for all children (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Gunning, T. G. (2000). Phonological awareness and primary phonics. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Hammond, B. (2005). Teaching African American learners to read: Newark, DE: IRA. Harp, B., & Brewer, J. (2004).The informed reading teacher. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall. Heilman, A. (1998). Phonics in proper perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill. Heilman, A., Blair, T., & Rupley, W. (1998).Principles and practices of teaching reading (9th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall. Johnson, D. (2001). Vocabulary in the elementary and middle school. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P. B., Pearson, P. D., & Barr, R. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of reading research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Krashen, S. D. (2003). Explorations in language acquisition and use. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Lenski, S. D., & Nierstheimer, S. L. (2004). Becoming a teacher of reading: A developmental approach. Upper Saddler River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Lyons, C. A. (2003). Teaching struggling readers how to use brain-based research to maximize learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Macrorie, K. (1988). The I-search paper. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Mandel, L., Morrow, L., Gambrell, L. B., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (2003). Best practices in literacy instruction. Newark, DE: IRA. May, F. (2001). Unraveling the seven myths of reading. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. McCormick, R., & Paratore, J. (Eds.). (2003). After early intervention, then what? Teaching struggling readers in grades 3 and beyond. Newark, DE: IRA. McLaughlin, M., & Allen, M. B. (2002). Guided comprehension: A teaching model for grades 3-8. Newark, DE: IRA. Moore, R., & Gilles, R. (2005). Reading conversations: Retrospective miscue analysis with struggling readers, grades 4-12. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Mueller, P. N. (2001). Lifers: Learning from at-risk adolescent readers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Opitz, M. F., & Rasinski, T. (1998). Good-bye round robin: 25 effective oral reading strategies. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Pinnell, G. S., & Fountas, I. C. (1998). Word matters: Teaching phonics and spelling in the reading/writing classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Power, B., & Hubbard, R. (2001). Language development: A reader for teachers (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall. Prescott-Griffin, M. L. (2005). Reader to reader: Building independence through peer partnerships. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Prescott-Griffin, M. L., & Witherell, N. L. (2004). Fluency in focus: Comprehension strategies for all young readers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Putnam, L. (Ed.). (1996). How to become a better reading teacher. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall. Rasinski, T. (2003). The fluent reader: Oral reading strategies for building word recognition, fluency, and comprehension. New York: Scholastic. Rasinski, T., & Padak, N. (2000). Effective reading strategies: Teaching children who find reading difficult (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall. Rasinski, T., & Padak, N. (2001). From phonics to fluency: Effective teaching of decoding and reading fluency in the elementary school. Newark, DE: IRA. Reynolds, M. (2004). I won't read and you can't make me. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Rhodes, L. K. (Ed.). (1992). Literacy assessment: A handbook of instruments. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Robinson, R. (2000). Historical sources in U.S. reading education. 1900-1970: An annotated bibliography. Newark, DE: IRA. Robinson, R. (2003). Readings in reading instruction: Its history, theory, and development. Boston, Allyn & Bacon. Robinson, R. D., McKenna, M. C., Wedman, J. M., & et.al. (2000). Issues and trends in literacy education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon. Routman, R. (2002). Reading essentials: The specifics you need to teach reading well. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Ruddell, R., Ruddell, M., & Singer, R. (1994). Theoretical models and processes of reading: Newark, DE: IRA. Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N. (eds.). Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.). Newark, DE: IRA. Santman, D. (2005). Shades of meaning: Comprehension and intrepretation in middle school. Portsmouth, NH. Schoenbach, R., & Greenleaf, C. (1999). Reading for understanding. New York: Jossey-Bass. Smith, F. (1996). Reading without nonsense (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press. Smith, F. (2003). Unspeakable acts, unnatural practices: Flaws and falacies in scientific reading instruction. Portsmouth, NH. Smith, N. B. (2002). American reading instruction. Newark, DE: IRA. Smith, R. (2005). Teaching reading in today's middle school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Steineke, N. (2003). Reading and writing together: Collaborative literacy in action. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Strickland, K. (2005). What's after assessment? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Tompkins, G. E. (2003). Literature for the 21st century (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill. Tyner, B. (2004). Small-group reading instruction: A differentiated teaching model for beginning and struggling readers. Newark, DE: IRA. Weaver, C. (2002). Reading process and practice (3rd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Wilde, S. (2000). Miscue analysis made easy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.