KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet (10/02/2002)
Course Number/Program Name ECE 8470 Analysis of Literacy Development and Reading
Instruction
Department Elementary and Early Childhood Education
Degree Title (if applicable) Ed.D. Program
Proposed Effective Date Fall 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
Page 1 of 26
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 ECE 8470____________________
Course Title __Analysis of Literacy Development and Reading Instruction
Credit Hours 3
Prerequisites Acceptance to the Ed.D. program
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements)
This course provides opportunities for candidates to analyze and synthesize scientifically- based research
in order to promote reading expertise among learners with diverse backgrounds. Candidates will design
research projects and use inquiry methods to identify effective ways to foster strategic reading as students
explore literary genres and multiple texts. Emphasis will be placed on the reading process and the
organizational management of reading instruction.
III.
Justification
The purpose of this course is to provide each candidate with an opportunity to conduct
in-depth examination specific aspects of the reading process from early reading through transitions into
reading proficiency. Candidates will explore ideas for fostering strategic reading of various genres through
experiences with multiple texts and guided reading. They will develop expertise with classroom
management strategies for reading workshop, writing workshop, and literature circles.
IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor: To be assigned
Texts:
Pinnell, G. S., & Sharer, P. L. (2003). Teaching for comprehension in reading: Strategies for helping children with
ease, confidence, and understanding. New York: Scholastic.
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2001). Guiding readers and writers: Teaching comprehension, genre, and content
literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Page 2 of 26
Objectives:
Course Objectives
Doctoral
KSDs
Distributed School
Leadership Roles
NCATE
IRA Reading
Standards
Demonstrate knowledge of
sociological, psychological, and
linguistic foundations of reading
and writing processes in relation to
pedagogical applications for
developmentally appropriate
instruction.
1.a, 1.b, 4.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader
Data Analysis Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 1.1
Demonstrate an understanding of
reading research and how it
applies to pedagogical practices in
the context of instructional
practices in reading.
1.a, 1.b, 4.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader
Data Analysis Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 1.2
Demonstrate knowledge of
language acquisition and reading
development to meet the needs
and interests of students in various
cultural and linguistic contexts.
1.a, 1.b, 2.c
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 4:
Diversity
Standard 1.3
Use various research-based
strategies, incorporating the major
components of reading (phonemic
1.a, 1.b, 1.e,
3.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Standard 1.4
NCTE
Professional
Standards for
the ELA
Standard 3.7
Evidence
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Class Activities
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Page 3 of 26
awareness, word identification and
phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and
comprehension), to promote
reading proficiency.
Skills &
Dispositions
Use instructional grouping options
(individual, small-group, wholeclass, and computer-based) as
appropriate to foster positive
attitudes in reading and writing with
students in classrooms.
1.a, 2.c, 2.e,
4.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Data Analysis Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 2.1
Standard
3.3.2
Analyze and implement highinterest reading materials,
activities, and approaches to meet
the specific needs of learners at
different stages of development
and from differing cultural and
linguistic backgrounds.
1.a, 6.a, 6.b,
6.d
Learning & Development
Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Change Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 2.2
Standard
3.3.2
Research and analyze ideas from
various compensatory reading
programs for effective reading
instruction to meet the needs of
learners at different stages of
reading and writing development
from a variety of cultural and
linguistic backgrounds.
Display positive dispositions
related to reading and the teaching
of reading through active class
participation and online journaling.
1.a, 1.b, 2.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader
Operations Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Change Leader
Performance Leader
Learning and
Development Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 2.3
Standard
3.3.2
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 5.1
4.a, 4.d, 5.b,
5.c
3.6.3
Standard 4.0
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Class Activities
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Portfolio
Class Activities
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Portfolio
Exam
Class Activities
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Exam
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Class Activities
Page 4 of 26
Instructional Method
Lecture, discussion, internet, journaling, research, case studies, conferences, portfolios
EVALUATION AND GRADING (for each course):
Evaluation and Grading:
Profile of Readers and Writers
Group Presentation of Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing Journal
Analysis of Compensatory Reading Programs
Portfolio
Exam
(250 points)
(150 points)
(200 points)
(250 points)
( 50 points)
(200 points)
Due Dates
Week 14
Week 13
Ongoing
Week 10
Week 15
TBA
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 20 %
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.
Professional Standards for Written Work: When submitting work, please remember the following:
secure single sheets of paper—DO NOT dog ear 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 professional standards. In
some cases, I may return the work without a grade.
Grading Scale: 900 – 1000 A
800 – 899 B
700 – 799 C
V.
Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
*Course funding is addressed in a comprehensive manner in the comprehensive proposal for the umbrella
Ed.D degree for the Bagwell College of Education.
Resource
Amount
Faculty
Other Personnel
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
New Books
New Journals
Other (Specify)
Page 5 of 26
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
Ed.D.
ECE 8470
Lit Dev & Rdg Ins
3
Fall 2006
Regular
APPROVED:
________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __
VII Attach Syllabus
Page 6 of 26
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
Fall 2006
Course Number/Section: 8470
Course Title: Analysis of Literacy Development and Reading Instruction
Instructors: To be assigned
e-mail:
Office: Office Phone:
Office Hours:
Class Meeting: TBA
Texts:
Pinnell, G. S., & Sharer, P. L. (2003). Teaching for comprehension in reading: Strategies for helping children with
ease, confidence, and understanding. New York: Scholastic.
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2001). Guiding readers and writers: Teaching comprehension, genre, and content
literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Catalog Description:
This course provides opportunities for candidates to analyze and synthesize scientifically- based research in order to
promote reading expertise among learners with diverse backgrounds. Candidates will design research projects and
use inquiry methods to identify effective ways to foster strategic reading as students explore literary genres and
multiple texts. Emphasis will be placed on the reading process and the organizational management of reading
instruction.
Rationale/Purpose:
The purpose of this course is to provide each candidate with an opportunity to conduct
in-depth examination specific aspects of the reading process from early reading through transitions into reading
proficiency. Candidates will explore ideas for fostering strategic reading of various genres through experiences with
multiple texts and guided reading. They will develop expertise with classroom management strategies for reading
workshop, writing workshop, and literature circles.
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY’S CONCEPTUAL 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
Page 7 of 26
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 at the doctoral level develop into
leaders for learning and 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.
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 believe 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.
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. During the courses, candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore
and use instructional media. They will master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and
Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
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:
Page 8 of 26
Course Objectives
Doctoral
KSDs
Distributed School
Leadership Roles
NCATE
IRA Reading
Standards
Demonstrate knowledge of
sociological, psychological, and
linguistic foundations of reading
and writing processes in relation to
pedagogical applications for
developmentally appropriate
instruction.
1.a, 1.b, 4.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader,
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader
Data Analysis Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 1.1
Demonstrate an understanding of
reading research and how it
applies to pedagogical practices in
the context of instructional
practices in reading.
1.a, 1.b, 4.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader
Data Analysis Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 1.2
Demonstrate knowledge of
language acquisition and reading
development to meet the needs
and interests of students in various
cultural and linguistic contexts.
1.a, 1.b, 2.c
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 4:
Diversity
Standard 1.3
Use various research-based
strategies, incorporating the major
components of reading (phonemic
awareness, word identification and
1.a, 1.b, 1.e,
3.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Standard 1.4
NCTE
Professional
Standards for
the ELA
Standard 3.7
Evidence
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Class Activities
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Page 9 of 26
phonics, vocabulary, fluency, and
comprehension), to promote
reading proficiency.
Dispositions
Use instructional grouping options
(individual, small-group, wholeclass, and computer-based) as
appropriate to foster positive
attitudes in reading and writing with
students in classrooms.
1.a, 2.c, 2.e,
4.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Data Analysis Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 2.1
Standard
3.3.2
Analyze and implement highinterest reading materials,
activities, and approaches to meet
the specific needs of learners at
different stages of development
and from differing cultural and
linguistic backgrounds.
1.a, 6.a, 6.b,
6.d
Learning & Development
Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Change Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 2.2
Standard
3.3.2
Research and analyze ideas from
various compensatory reading
programs for effective reading
instruction to meet the needs of
learners at different stages of
reading and writing development
from a variety of cultural and
linguistic backgrounds.
Display positive dispositions
related to reading and the teaching
of reading through active class
participation and online journaling.
1.a, 1.b, 2.b
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader
Operations Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Change Leader
Performance Leader
Learning and
Development Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 2.3
Standard
3.3.2
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 5.1
4.a, 4.d, 5.b,
5.c
3.6.3
Standard 4.0
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Class Activities
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Portfolio
Class Activities
Exam
Profile of Readers and
Writers
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Portfolio
Exam
Class Activities
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Analysis of Compensatory
Reading Programs
Portfolio
Exam
Group Presentation of
Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing
Journal
Class Activities
Page 10 of 26
Assignments:
1. Profile of Readers and Writers – This will be an analysis of the impact of various instructional approaches
that includes interest inventories and other background information such as anecdotal observations and
ongoing analyses of students’ progress over the semester as candidates conduct observations during
reading workshops, writing workshops, and literature circles. This will include a detailed analysis of the
impact of specific approaches on student learning.
(250 points)
2. Group Presentation of Reading Approaches – Present research that encompasses various instructional
approaches for teaching reading, such as guided reading, reading/writing workshop, book clubs, and
literature circles. The group will evaluate these approaches collectively. (150 points)
3. Online Reflective/Dialoguing Journal – Write a brief reflective biographical sketch explaining your
background in learning to read and your experiences as a reader. Then reflect on how early literacy
experiences have influenced your teaching of reading. You will also indicate your responses to class
presentations and activities. To promote collaborative reflection, you will dialogue with peers and instructors
to analyze the impact of your instruction on student learning throughout the semester. (200 points)
4. Analysis of Compensatory Reading Programs – Choose one program to analyze and explain the
research evidence to support your choice. Explain the benefits of this program for your district as if you were
a reading consultant. Research and write a brief description of each of the four main compensatory reading
programs used in the elementary school (Reading Recovery, Success for All, Reading First, and Four
Blocks). Discuss the ways each of these programs could be implemented. (300 points) Portfolio (100
points)
Evaluation and Grading:
Profile of Readers and Writers
Group Presentation of Reading Approaches
Online Reflective/Dialoguing Journal
Analysis of Compensatory Reading Programs
Portfolio
Exam
(250 points)
(150 points)
(200 points)
(250 points)
( 50 points)
(200 points)
Due Dates
Week 14
Week 13
Ongoing
Week 10
Week 15
TBA
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 20 %
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.
Professional Standards for Written Work: When submitting work, please remember the following:
secure single sheets of paper—DO NOT dog ear 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 professional standards. In
some cases, I may return the work without a grade.
Page 11 of 26
Grading Scale: 900 – 1000 A
800 – 899 B
700 – 799 C
IX. Policies
Diversity: 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.
Professionalism- Academic Honesty: KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their academic programs in an ethical,
professional manner. Faculty of the EdS and EdD programs abide by the policies and guidelines established by the university in
their expectations for candidates’ work. Candidates are responsible for knowing and adhering to the guidelines of academic
honesty as stated in the graduate catalog. Any candidate who is found to have violated these guidelines will be subject to
disciplinary action consistent with university policy. For example, plagiarism or other violations of the University’s Academic
Honesty policies could result in a grade of “F” in the course and a formal hearing before the Judiciary Committee.
Professionalism- Participation and Attendance: Part of your success in this class is related to your ability to provide peer
reviews and feedback to your editing groups regarding their research and their writing. Furthermore, responding effectively and
appropriately to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s professionalism. In addition, since
each class meeting represents a week of instruction/learning, failure to attend class will likely impact your performance on
assignments and final exams. Please be prepared with all readings completed prior to class. We depend on one another to ask
pertinent and insightful questions.
Course Outline:
This is a tentative schedule. I have indicated the dates that readings from your text are due. I may also assign other
readings which are not indicated on the reading schedule. As I see your needs and interests, I will announce them as
the need arises. Specific chapters from Pinnell and Scharer will be assigned as readings to extend specific chapters.
Week 1 Introduction & Syllabus – Chapter 1 Exploring the Reading Process
Exploring and Evaluating Personal Experiences with Reading and Writing
Construct Definitions of Reading and Writing
Goals and Frameworks for Intermediate Literacy Programs
Language and Word Study Design – Reading and Writing
Page 12 of 26
Week 2 Chapter 2 Teaching For Comprehension Across Language and Literacy
Framework
Emergent Literacy Through Proficient Reading Development
Exploring Letter Sound Recognition
Exploring Concepts of Print – Discuss the Clay Inventory
Exploring Segmentation and Blending Through Yopp Singer
Contrasting Models of Reading and Learning to Read
Week 3 Reading – What’s It All About?
Cueing Systems, Stance, Schema, and Cognitive Processes
Compensatory Reading Programs – Reading Recovery and Success For All
Week 4 Chapters 3 & 4 – From Primary to Intermediate Grades: How Do
Children Change as Readers?
Transitions in Reading, Spelling, and Writing Development –
Stages of Development
Compensatory Reading Programs - Reading First and The Four Blocks
Week 5 Chapter 5 – The Literary Path to Comprehension: Writer’s Craft and
Guided Reading
Understanding, Planning, and Dynamic Grouping for Guided Reading
Week 6 Chapter 6 – Scaffolding the First Reading of a Book for Children Who
Are Learning to Read
Discovering Literature Study – The Essential Elements
Putting Literature Study in Action and Responding to Literature
Week 7 Chapter 7 – Teaching Versus Prompting: Supporting Comprehension
In Guided Reading
Word Perception in the Reading Process
Teaching for Word- Solving: Phonics, Spelling, and Vocabulary
Questioning Strategies, Conversations, Picture Walks, and Pre-Reading
Strategies
Week 8 Chapter 8 – Teaching for Phrasing and Fluency – Connections to
Comprehension
Teaching For Sustaining Strategies in Guided Reading
Teaching For Connecting and Expanding Strategies
Week 9 Chapter 9 Teaching for Comprehension in Guided and Independent
Reading
Encouraging Independent Reading
Planning Effective Mini lessons and Conferences
Exploring Meaning Through Response Journals
Week 10 Chapter 10 Extending the Meaning of Texts
Beyond the Book in Guided Reading
Extending Books Through Language Arts and the Fine Arts
Teaching Genre and Content Literacy
Creating the Poetry Workshop
Page 13 of 26
Week 11 Chapter 11 Interactive Read-Aloud: Supporting and Expanding
Strategies For Comprehension
Explore Compensatory Reading Programs and Various Approaches to
Teaching Reading as a Basis for
Constructing and Implementing High-interest Reading Materials to Meet the
Specific Needs of All Learners
Exploring the Writers’ Terrain
Week 12 Chapter 12 – Problem-Solving For Managed Independent Learning:
What Makes It Work?
Getting Started: The First Twenty Days of Independent Reading
Accommodating Struggling Readers and Writers
Week 13 Chapter 13 – Shifting Teaching and Management To Meet Learners’
Changing Needs: Transitions From Primary to Intermediate
Becoming Joyful Readers and Accomplished Writers
Reading Workshop and Writing Workshop
Week 14 Chapter 14 – Questions and Answers About Classroom Management
With Reading and Writing Workshop Approaches
Making It Work: Organizing and Managing Time, Space, and Resources
Helping Students with Book Selection for Independent Reading
Activities For Fostering Independent Reading
Comparing Literature Circles with Reading and Writing Workshop
Week 15 Supporting Readers and Writers: Tools That Make a Difference in
Comprehending and Constructing Texts
Understanding the “Testing Genre”: Preparing Students For High Quality
Performance
Making Teaching Decisions Using Continuous Assessment
References
Bruneau, B. J. (1997). The literacy pyramid organization of reading/writing activities in a whole language classroom.
The Reading Teacher, 51, 158-266.
Bishop, R.S. (Ed.). (1994). Kaleidoscope: A multicultural booklist for grades K-8. Urbana, IL: National Council of
Teachers of English.
Bryan, J. (1998). K-W-W-L: Questioning the unknown. The Reading Teacher, 51, 618-621.
Calkins, L.M. (1986). The art of teaching writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Carbo, M. (1996). Whole language or phonics? Use both! Education Digest, 61, 60-63.
Clay, M.M. (1985). The early detection of reading difficulties. (3rd ed.). Aukland, New Zealand: Heinemann, Inc.
Cooper, J.D. (2000). Literacy: Helping children construct meaning. (4th ed.). Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Fountas, I.C. & Pinnell, G.S. (1996). Guided reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Page 14 of 26
Good, R.H. & Kaminski, R.A. (Eds.). (2002). Dynamic indicators of basic early literacy skills. (6th ed.). Eugene, OR:
Institute for the Development of Educational Achievement. Available: http://dibels.uoregon.edu/
Gambrell, L.B. (1996). Creating classroom cultures that foster reading motivation. The Reading Teacher, 50, 14-25.
Gaspar, R.E. (1997). What does reading software have to offer? Learning, 26, 35-38.
Geist, E. (1998). Computers can turn on reluctant readers. Creative Classroom, 22, 45-50.
Guliaume, A.M. (1998). Learning with text in the primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 51, 476-485.
Harris, V.J. (Ed.). (1993). Teaching multicultural literature in grades K-8. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
Honig, B. (1997). Research-based reading instruction: the right way. Education Digest, 63, 15-20.
Hickman, J. & Cullinan, B.E. (Eds.). (1989). Children’s literature in the classroom: Weaving Charlotte’s web.
Needham Heights, MA: Christopher-Gordon.
Huck, C.S., Kiefer, B.Z., Hepler, S., & Hickman, J. (2004). Children’s literature in the elementary school. (8th ed.).
Boston: McGraw Hill.
Johnston, F. (1998). The reader, the text, and the task: learning words in first grade. The Reading Teacher, 51, 666675.
Kolb, G. (1996) . Read with a beat: Developing literacy through music and song. The Reading Teacher, 50, 89-92.
Koskinen, P. (1995). Peers as reading tutors: Guidelines for successful practices. The Reading Teacher, 51, 562569.
Leslie, L. & Caldwell, J. (1995). Qualitative Reading Inventory-II. New York: Harper Collins College Publishers.
Meece, J.L., & Miller, S.D. (1997). Enhancing elementary students' motivation to read and write: A classroom
intervention study. The Journal of Educational Research, 90, 286-299.
Miller, H.M. (1997). Teaching and learning about cultural diversity -breaking the silence. The Reading Teacher, 51,
260-262.
Montgomery, K. J. (1998). Assessing talking and writing: Linguistic competence for students at risk. Reading and
Writing Quarterly, 14, 243-260.
Overview of learning to read and write: Developmentally appropriate practices for young children. National
Association for the Education of Young People [online] http://www.naeyc.org/about/position/psread 0 htm.
Quintero, E. & Rummel, M.K. (1996). Something to say -Voice in the classroom. Childhood Education, 52, 146-151.
Spiegel, D.L. (1998). Reader response approaches and the growth of readers. Language Arts, 76, 41-48.
Stice, C.F. (1998). Just a little fish tale: past, present, future. Language Arts, 75, 45- 47.
Strickland, D.S. (1997). Teach the skills and thrills of reading. Instructor, 32, 65-72.
Strickland, D.S. (1998). What's basic in beginning reading? Finding common ground. Educational Leadership, 55, 611.
Page 15 of 26
Tierney, R.J., Carter, M.A., & Desai, L.E. (1991). Portfolio assessment in the reading-writing classroom. Norwood,
MA: Christopher-Gordon.
Towell, J. (1997). Teaching reading: fun with vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 1, 356-358.
Wagstaff, J.M. (1997). Building practical knowledge of letter-sound correspondences: A beginner's word wall and
beyond. The Reading Teacher, 51, (4), 298-303.
Wasik, B.A. (1998). Using transactional strategies approach to reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 49, 256258.
West, K.R. (1998). Noticing and responding to learners: Literacy evaluation in the primary grades. The Reading
Teacher, 51, (7), 550-559.
Page 16 of 26
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
DEPARTMENT OF ELEMENTARY AND EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION
Fall 2006
Course Number/Section: 8460
Course Title: Practicum for Strategic Reading in the Content Areas
Instructors: TBA
e-mail:
Office:
Office Phone:
Class Meeting: TBA
Texts:
Walker, B. J. (2004). Diagnostic teaching of reading: Techniques for instruction and
assessment (5th ed.). NY: Pearson – Merrill, Prentice Hall.
Brozo, W. G., & Simpson, M. L. (2002). Readers, teachers, and learners: Exploring literacy across the content areas.
(4th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Catalog Description:
This course synthesizes various reading theories and translates theory into practice. Through mentoring relationships
candidates will use research-based strategies to meet the specific needs of students with diverse backgrounds and
foster reading expertise. During tutorial sessions they will explore major components of reading in light of students’
interests and current research. As reflective practitioners, candidates will analyze the connections between tutorial
strategies and classroom teaching.
Rationale/Purpose:
This course provides students with opportunities to explore and personalize effective methods for tutoring. This will
help them to effectively meet the needs of students and apply literacy strategies in their own classrooms. The tutorial
experience will also equip them with tools for effective collaboration with parents to support literacy experiences in
the home.
Page 17 of 26
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY’S CONCEPTUAL 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 endstate. 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 at the doctoral level develop into leaders for learning and
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.
Knowledge Base
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases: preservice, induction, inservice, 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 believe 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.
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. During the courses, candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore
and use instructional media. They will master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and
Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
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:
Page 18 of 26
Course Objectives
Demonstrate knowledge
of psychological,
sociological, and linguistic
foundations of reading
and writing processes
and instruction.
Demonstrate knowledge
of reading research and
develop a working
knowledge of effective
assessment methods and
reading strategies.
Demonstrate knowledge
of language development,
reading acquisition, and
the variations related to
cultural and linguistic
diversity in relation to
assessment and tutoring.
Demonstrate and apply
knowledge of the major
components of reading,
discuss methods of
reading assessment, and
application of tutorial
strategies in the
classroom.
Demonstrate ongoing
collaboration with parents
and support of parents as
they provide literacy
experiences in the home.
Use assessments,
including technologybased practices, for
learners at different
stages of development
and from differing cultural
and linguistic
backgrounds.
Use a variety of reading
strategies for learners at
different stages of reading
Candidate
Performance
Instrument
(CPI)
Proficiency 1:
Subject Matter
Experts
NCATE
IRA Reading
Standards
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 1.1
Proficiency 1:
Subject Matter
Experts
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 1.2
Proficiency 1:
Subject Matter
Experts
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 4:
Diversity
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 1.3
Proficiency 2:
Facilitators of
Learning
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 2.1
Standard
3.3.2
Proficiency 2:
Facilitators of
Learning
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 2.2
Standard
3.3.2
Proficiency 2:
Facilitators of
Learning
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Standard 2.3
Standard
3.3.2
Proficiency 1:
Subject Matter
Experts
NCTE
Professional
Standards for
the ELA
Standard 3.7
Standard 1.4
Evidence
Online Reflective Journal
Portfolio
Case Study/Literacy Profile
Instructional Summary
Analysis of Reading Strategies
Parent Conference
Online Reflective Journal
Portfolio
Case Study/Literacy Profile
Instructional Summary
Analysis of Reading Strategies
Strategic Tutorial Plan
Online Reflective Journal
Portfolio
Case Study/Literacy Profile
Instructional Summary
Analysis of Reading Strategies
Strategic Tutorial Plan
Parent Conference
Online Reflective Journal
Portfolio
Case Study/Literacy Profile
Instructional Summary
Analysis of Reading Strategies
Strategic Tutorial Plan
Parent Conference
Online Reflective Journal
Portfolio
Case Study/Literacy Profile
Instructional Summary
Analysis of Reading Strategies
Strategic Tutorial Plan
Parent Conference
Strategic Tutorial Planning
Online Reflective Journal
Portfolio
Case Study/Literacy Profile
Instructional Summary
Analysis of Reading Strategies
Strategic Tutorial Plan
Online Reflective Journal
Portfolio
Case Study/Literacy Profile
Page 19 of 26
and writing development
from differing cultural and
linguistic backgrounds.
Display positive
dispositions related to
reading and the tutorial
process.
Skills &
Dispositions
Proficiency 3:
Collaborative
Professionals
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
3.6.3
Standard 5.1
Standard 4.0
Instructional Summary
Analysis of Reading Strategies
Strategic Tutorial Plan
Parent Conference
Implementing a Tutorial Plan
Case Study/Literacy Profile
Parent Conference
Online Reflective Journal
Assignments:
5. Constructing and Implementing a Strategic Tutorial Plan – Consider all data available in relation to a
tutee’s achievement, and conduct assessment in relation to the five main areas of reading. Consider specific
strategies for scaffolding to match the specific needs and interests of the tutee. As you work with your child
in the practicum, create high-interest materials and use strategies for the major components of reading. (100
points)
6. Online Reflective/Dialoguing Journal – Write a brief reflective biographical sketch explaining your
background in learning to read and your experiences as a reader. Then reflect on how early literacy
experiences have influenced your teaching of reading. You will tie this reflection with your case study and
tutoring. To promote collaborative reflection, you will dialogue with peers and instructors to analyze your
tutorial strategies and their effectiveness with your tutee throughout the semester. (100 points)
7. Case Study/Literacy Profile Based on Tutoring – This will be an ethnographic case study of a tutee that
includes an interest inventory, background information, data collected from assessments, and ongoing
analysis of the tutee’s progress over the semester. Candidates will include a detailed impact on student
learning analysis in relation to their literacy instruction with a tutee and a complete bibliography of books and
materials used during tutoring. (200 points)
8. Instructional Summary – Analyze and describe the scaffolding and specific strategies that you used with a
tutee throughout the practicum. Explain the specific teaching methods you used and the ways the tutee
responded to those strategies. Present your findings to the class. This can be a group project or an
individual project. (200 points)
9. Parent Conference and Portfolio Presentation – Use the instructional summary as a basis to provide
parents with specific examples of your tutee’s strengths and areas needing additional concentration. Provide
the parent’s with specific recommendations in relation to comprehension, vocabulary, phonemic awareness,
phonics, and fluency. Share specific strategies that relate to the specific needs of the student you tutored,
and help the parents to see ways they can promote the tutee’s continued reading progress. Collaborate with
the tutee to share the portfolio and favorite stories/experiences from the semester. (150 points)
10. Analysis of Reading Strategies Used in Tutoring and Classroom Teaching- – Write a paper that
outlines your own views on literacy assessment. Through the process of writing this paper, you will explore
your perspective of literacy assessment, aspects that influence your thinking, and your goals for continuing
to develop and refine your repertoire of reading strategies. (200 points) Candidates will develop an online
portfolio to demonstrate their accomplishments in the program. (50 points)
Evaluation and Grading: 900 – 1000 A
Strategic Tutorial Plan
Online Reflective/Dialoguing Journal
(100 points)
(100 points)
Due Dates
Week 3
Ongoing
Page 20 of 26
Case Study/Literacy Profile Based on Tutoring
Instructional Summary
Parent Conference and Portfolio Presentation
Analysis of Reading Strategies
Portfolio
(200 points)
(200 points)
(150 points)
(200 points)
( 50 points)
Week 14
Week 14
Week 15
Week 13
Week 15
Late Work: I will accept late work. However, one letter grade will be deducted for late assignments.
Professional Standards for Written Work: When submitting work, please remember the following:
secure single sheets of paper—DO NOT dog ear 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 professional standards. In
some cases, I may return the work without a grade.
Grading Scale: 900 – 1000 A
800 – 899 B
700 – 799 C
IX. Policies
Diversity: 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.
Professionalism- Academic Honesty: KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their academic programs in
an ethical, professional manner. Faculty of the EdS and EdD programs abide by the policies and guidelines
established by the university in their expectations for candidates’ work. Candidates are responsible for knowing and
adhering to the guidelines of academic honesty as stated in the graduate catalog. Any candidate who is found to
have violated these guidelines will be subject to disciplinary action consistent with university policy. For example,
Page 21 of 26
plagiarism or other violations of the University’s Academic Honesty policies could result in a grade of “F” in the
course and a formal hearing before the Judiciary Committee.
Professionalism- Participation and Attendance: Part of your success in this class is related to your ability to
provide peer reviews and feedback to your editing groups regarding their research and their writing. Furthermore,
responding effectively and appropriately to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s
professionalism. In addition, since each class meeting represents a week of instruction/learning, failure to attend
class will likely impact your performance on assignments and final exams. Please be prepared with all readings
completed prior to class. We depend on one another to ask pertinent and insightful questions.
Course Outline:
This is a tentative schedule. I have indicated the dates that readings from your text are due. I may also assign other
readings which are not indicated on the reading schedule. As I see your needs and interests, I will announce them as
the need arises. We will focus on the text by Walker (2004) for 10 weeks with ongoing references to the text by Brozo
and Simpson (2002). Then we will focus on the text by Brozo and Simpson during the last five weeks with ongoing
references to reading strategies from the text by Walker (2004).
Week 1 –What is Diagnostic Teaching? – Chapter 1 (Walker, 2004)
Active Reading
The Assessment Process
The Diagnostic Teaching Process
Week 2 – The Reading Event – Chapter 2 (Walker, 2004)
Task
Text
Reader
Technique
Context
Week 3 – Roles of Diagnostic Teachers – Chapter 3 (Walker, 2004)
Reflecting
Strategic Planning
Week 4 – The Diagnostic Teaching Session: An Overview –Chapter 4 (Walker, 2004)
Continuous Diagnostic Assessment
Guided Contextual Reading
Strategy and Skill Instruction
Week 5 – Gathering Diagnostic Data – Chapter 5 (Walker, 2004)
Establishing the Level of Student Performance
Further Assessments
Stages of Reading Development
Week 6 – Formulating Diagnostic Hypotheses – Chapter 6 (Walker, 2004)
Reflecting on Print and Meaning Processing
Analyzing Oral Reading
Reflecting on the Reading Event
Week 7 – Assessment Using Diagnostic Lessons – Chapter 7 (Walker, 2004)
Page 22 of 26
Establishing a Mediated Reading Level
Procedures for Diagnostic Sessions
Special Considerations
Week 8 – Assessment Using Portfolios – Chapter 8 (Walker, 2004)
Procedures for Portfolios
Using Portfolios
Week 9 – Selecting Materials – Chapter 9 (Walker, 2004)
Basic Types of Materials
Selecting Material for a Particular Reader
More Considerations for Selecting Materials
Week 10 Selecting Techniques – Chapter 10 (Walker, 2004)
Classifying Techniques for Guided Contextual Reading
Classifying Techniques for Strategy and Skill Instruction
Classifying Techniques for Increased Specificity
Week 11 Comprehension Strategies – Chapter 3 (Brozo & Simpson)
Activating Prior Knowledge
Organizing Text Structures for Meaning Making
Critical Thinking and Elaborations
Week 12 Expanding Vocabulary and Developing – Chapter 6 (Brozo & Simpson)
Concepts
Guidelines for Effective Vocabulary Instruction
Selecting Key Terms and Concepts
Building Vocabulary Knowledge
Promoting Independent Word Learning
Week 13 Writing as a Tool for Active Learning – Chapter 7 (Brozo & Simpson)
Reading and Writing as Constructive and Parallel Processes
Guidelines for the Use of Writing Across the Content Areas
Writing Activities that Prepare Students for Learning
Writing Activities That Encourage Students to Construct Meaning and Monitor
Their Own Comprehension
Writing Activities that Encourage Students to Think Critically
Critical Issues Concerning the Use of Writing as a Means of Learning
Week 14 Literature Across the Curriculum and Throughout Life –
Chapters 8 & 9 – (Brozo & Simpson)
Guidelines for Integrating Literature into Content Classrooms
Teaching with Trade Books and Textbooks: Symbiosis
Promoting Lifelong Reading Habits
Week 15 Becoming an Effective Literacy Professional – Chapter 12 (Brozo & Simpson)
Literacy Innovations in the Content Classroom
Supporting Meaningful Change in Teacher Practice
Characteristics of Effective Teachers
Page 23 of 26
References
Afflerbach, P. (1993). STAIR: A system for recording and using what we observe and know about our students. The
Reading Teacher, 47, 260-263.
Allington, R. L. (2001). What really matters for struggling readers: Designing research-based programs. NY:
Longman.
Allington, R. L., & Walmsley, S. A. (1995). No quick fix. Newark, DE: International Reading Association & NY:
Teachers College Press.
Applegate, M. D., Quinn, K. B., & Applegate, A. J. (2002). Levels of thinking required by comprehension questions in
informal reading inventories. The Reading Teacher, 56, 174-180.
Au, K. H. (1998). Social constructivism and the school literacy learning of students of diverse backgrounds. Journal of
Literacy Research, 30, 297-319.
Braunger, J., & Lewis, J. (1996). Building a knowledge base in reading (2nd ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
Calfee, R. & Hiebert, E. (1991). Classroom assessment of reading. In R. Barr, A. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, and P. D.
Pearson (Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume II (pp. 281-309). NY: Longman.
Ciardiello, A. V. (1998). Did you ask a good question today? Alternative cognitive and metacognitive strategies.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 42, 210-219.
Clark, C. H. (1996). Keys to successful cognitive and affective intervention with challenging students. Reading &
Writing Quarterly, 12, 265-290.
Cunningham, J. W. (2001). The National Reading Panel report. Reading Research Quarterly, 36, 326-335.
Cunningham, P. M., Hall, D. P., & Defee, M. (1998). Nonability-grouped, multilevel instruction: Eight years later. The
Reading Teacher, 51, 652-664.
Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: the self-determination
perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26, 325- 346.
Dudley-Marling, C., & Murphy, S. (1997). A political critique of remedial reading programs: The example of Reading
Recovery. The Reading Teacher, 50, 460-468.
Duffy-Hester, A. M. (1998). Teaching struggling readers in elementary school classrooms: A review of classroom
reading programs and principles for instruction. The Reading Teacher, 52, 480-495.
Fitzgerald, J. (1995). English-as-a-second-language reading instruction in the United States: Research review.
Journal of Reading Behavior, 27, 115-152.
Foorman, B. R., Francis, D. J., Fletcher, J. M., Schatschneider, C., & Mehta, Paras, (1998). The role of instruction in
learning to read: Preventing reading failure in at-risk children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 90, 37-55.
Page 24 of 26
Freppon, P. A., & Dahl, D. A. (1998). Balanced instruction: Insights and considerations. Reading Research Quarterly,
33, 240-251.
Gambrell, L. B., Morrow, L. M., Neuman, S. B., & Pressley, M. (1999). Best practices in literacy instruction. NY:
Guilford Press.
Garcia, G. E. (2000). Bilingual children’s reading. In M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D.Pearson, & R. Barr (Eds.),
Handbook of reading research: Volume III (pp. 813-834). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Garcia, G. E., & Pearson, P. D. (1994). Assessment and diversity. In L. Darling- Hammond (Ed.), Review of
research in education: Volume 20 (pp. 337-391). Washington, DC: AERA.
Gaskins, I. W. (1998). There’s more to teaching at-risk and delayed readers than good reading instruction. The
Reading Teacher, 51, 534-547.
Guillaume, A. M. (1998). Learning with text in the primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 51, 476-486.
Graves, M. F., Van den Broek, P., & Taylor, B. M. (1996). The first R: Every child’s right to read. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association & NY: Teachers College Press.
Guthrie, J. T., & Wigfield, A. (Eds.) (1997). Reading engagement: Motivating readers through integrated instruction.
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Hidi, S. (1990). Interest and its contribution as a mental resource for learning. Review of Educational Research, 60,
549-571. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Johnston, P. H. (1984). Assessment in reading. In R. Barr, M. Kamil, and P. Mosenthal
(Eds.), Handbook of reading research: Volume I (pp. 147-182). NY: Longman.
Johnston, P., & Allington, R. (1991). Remediation. In R. Barr, M. L. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, & P. D. Pearson (Eds.),
Handbook of reading research: Volume II (pp. 984 - 1012). NY:Longman.
Johnston, P., & Winograd, P. (1985). Passive failure in reading. Journal of Reading Behavior, 17, 279-301.
Lapp, D., Fisher, D., Flood, J., & Cabello, A. (2001). In Hurley, S. R., & Tinajero, J. V. (Eds.), Literacy assessment of
second language learners. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Lipson, M. Y., & Wixson, K. K. (1997). The foundations of literacy. In M. Y. Lipson & K. K. Wixson, Assessment and
instruction of reading and writing disability: An interactive approach (2nd ed.) (pp. 223-267). NY: Longman.
Morrow, L. M. (1988). Retelling stories as a diagnostic tool. In S. M. Glazer, L. W. Searfoss, & L. M. Gentile (Eds.),
Reexamining reading diagnosis: New trends and procedures (pp. 128-149). Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
Nagy, W. E., & Herman, P. A. (1987). Breadth and depth of vocabulary knowledge: Implications for acquisition and
instruction. In Beck, I., and McKeown, M., Vocabulary acquisition (pp. 19 -35).
Ovando, C. J., & Collier, V. P. (1985). ESL and bilingual classrooms (pp. 101-152). NY: McGraw-Hill.
Page 25 of 26
Pearson, P. D., & Valencia, S. (1987). Assessment, accountability, and professional prerogative. In J. Readence & S.
Baldwin (Eds.), Research in literacy: Merging perspectives (pp. 3-16). Rochester, NH: National Reading
Conference.
Powell, R., Cantrell, S.C., & Adams, S. (2001). Saving Black Mountain: The promise of critical literacy in a
multicultural democracy. The Reading Teacher, 54, 772-781.
Schiefele, U. (1991). Interest, learning, and motivation. Educational Psychologist, 26, 299- 323.
Serafini, F. (2002-2001). Three paradigms of assessment: Measurement, procedure, and inquiry. The Reading
Teacher, 54, 384-393.
Schwartz, R. M. (1997). Self-monitoring in beginning reading. The Reading Teacher, 51, 40-48.
Stahl, S. A., Duffy-Hester, A. M., & Stahl, K. A. (1998). Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were afraid
to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33, 338-355.
Stahl, S. A., Hynd, C. R., Glynn, S. M., & Carr, M. (1996). Beyond reading to learn: Developing content and
disciplinary knowledge through texts. In L. Baker, P. Afflerbach, & D. Reinking (Eds.), Developing engaged readers
in school and home communities (pp.139-163), Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
Strecker, S. K., Roser, N. L., & Martinez, M. G. (1998). Toward understanding oral Reading fluency. National
Reading Conference Yearbook, 47, 295-310.
Taylor, C. (1994). Assessment for measurement or standards: The peril and promise of large-scale assessment
reform. American Educational Research Journal, 31, 231-262.
Taylor, B. M., Hanson, B. E., Justice-Swanson, K., & Watts, S. M. (1997). Helping struggling readers: Linking smallgroup intervention with cross-age tutoring. The Reading Teacher, 51, 196-209.
Templeton, S., & Morris, D. (1999). Theory and research into practice: Questions teachers ask about spelling.
Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 102-112. Research, 64, 37-54.
Worthy, Jo, Broaddus, K., & Ivey, G. (2001). Pathways to independence. NY: Guilford Press.
Page 26 of 26