EDRD 7718
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
Bagwell College of Education
READING ENDORSEMENT
Spring 2007
I.
COURSE NUMBER/SECTION: EDRD 7718
COURSE TITLE: Content Area Reading
II. INSTRUCTOR:
Name:
Office:
Office Phone:
E-mail:
Office Hours:
XXXX
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
xxxx
III. CLASS MEETING:
XXPM-XXPM, KH XXXX
IV. TEXT(S):
Alvermann, D. E. & Phelps, S. F. (2005). Content reading and literacy: Succeeding in today’s
diverse classrooms. Boston: Pearson
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.
*You will also need a content area textbook – You may use one that you teach with or check
one out of TRAC.
Additional Handouts, Readings and Related Material:
Throughout the course you will read additional articles from such sources as The Alan Review, The
Hornbook, English Journal, SIGNAL, The Reading Teacher, Content Area Reading, Reading Online, and
Reading Research Quarterly.)
The following websites will get you started with some class research:
http://www.ncte.org
www.readingonline.org,
www.reading.org
http://www.literacymatters.org/adlit/intro.htm
EDRD 7718
V. CATALOG DESCRIPTION:
An advanced study of the processes and problems of reading instruction in content area classrooms.
This course explores components of the reading process related to content area reading instruction
including technical reading, prior knowledge, reading strategies, supplemental texts, and methods of
grouping. Candidates will plan instruction based on content area requirements that supports readers
before, during, and after they read. Emphasis will be placed on supporting the unique reading needs of a
diverse classroom of learners at all grade levels. A field component is required.
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.
The purpose of this course is to provide candidates with the knowledge and skills to support the diverse
reading needs of students as they read to learn in the content areas. This includes evaluating the
textbook, choosing appropriate supplemental reading, and providing students with reading strategies to
make meaning from text. Further, this course will help candidates plan instruction to meet the diverse
needs of their students. After taking this course, candidates will have a stronger understanding of the
reading process including the five dimensions of reading (e.g. phonics, phonemic awareness, fluency,
vocabulary, comprehension) and factors that affect reading (e.g. text, context).
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 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.
2
EDRD 7718
Professional Portfolio Narrative:
As explained in EDRD 7715, a required element in each portfolio for the Reading Endorsement is the
portfolio narrative. The purpose of the portfolio narrative is to ensure that every candidate reflects on
each of the proficiencies on the RPI with regard to what evidence the candidate has selected for his/her
portfolio. In your portfolio, you need to include a narrative, which includes descriptive, analytic and
reflective writing in which you reflect on each proficiency and how you make the case that the evidence
you have selected in your portfolio supports a particular proficiency, using the Portfolio Narrative Rubric
as a guide. The narrative should be comprehensive, documenting research-based best practices.
Remember the following are required elements in the final portfolio:
The Literacy Profile—EDRD 7715
Analysis of the Reading Process, Assessment and Instruction Project—EDRD 7717
The Textbook Analysis and Instructional Plan Implementation with Video Critiques—EDRD 7718
The Impact on Student Learning Analysis—EDRD 7717
Evidence of a Professional Development Project (See Field Experience & Prof. Dev. Proj. below).
Field Experiences & Professional Development Project:
While completing your Reading Endorsement at Kennesaw State University, you are required to be
involved in 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, publishing reading research or best practices in reading instruction, actively serving on or
chairing reading-related committees, leading or presenting professional development activities at the
school, district, state or national level, and participating in reading-related community events. As you
continue your educational experiences, you are encouraged to explore every opportunity to learn by
doing. Evidence of your professional involvement is a required element of your final portfolio.
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.
3
EDRD 7718
Use of Technology:
Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the Reading
Endorsement preparation program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve
student learning and meet IRA Reading Standards. 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 use diagnostic
software.
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 Reading Performance Instrument--RPI), NCATE, and IRA
Professional Reading Standards:
Course Objectives/IRA
Standards
Reading
Performance
Instrument (RPI)
NCATE
Evidence
1.1 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.
Outcome 1:
Subject Matter Expert
1.1, 1.2
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Reading Research Synthesis
Textbook Analysis &
Instructional Plan
Implementation with Video
Critiques
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
1.2 Demonstrate knowledge or
reading research and reading
histories.
Outcome 1:
Subject Matter Expert
1.1, 1.3
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Reading Research Synthesis
Portfolio
4
EDRD 7718
1.3 Demonstrate knowledge of
language development and reading
acquisition and the variations
related to cultural and linguistic
diversity.
Outcome 1:
Subject Matter Expert
1.1, 1.4
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Reading Research Synthesis
Textbook Analysis &
Instructional Plan
Implementation with Video
Critiques
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
Portfolio
1.4 Demonstrates 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.
Outcome 1:
Subject Matter Expert
1.1
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Textbook Analysis &
Instructional Plan
Implementation with Video
Critiques
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
Portfolio
2.1 Use instructional grouping
options (individual, small-group,
whole-class, and computer-based)
as appropriate for accomplishing
given purposes.
Subject Matter Expert
1.2, 1.3
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Textbook Analysis &
Instructional Plan
Implementation with Video
Critiques
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
2.2 Use a wide range of
instructional practices, approaches,
and methods, including technologybased practices, for learners at
different stages of development and
from differing cultural and linguistic
backgrounds.
Outcome 1:
Subject Matter Expert
1.2, 1.3
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 4:
Diversity
Reading Research Synthesis
Textbook Analysis &
Instructional Plan
Implementation with Video
Critiques
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
2.3 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.
Outcome 2:
Facilitator of Learning
2.1, 2.4
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Reading Research Synthesis
Supplemental Text Annotated
Bibliography
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
4.1 Use students’ interests, reading
abilities and backgrounds as
foundations for the reading and
writing program.
Outcome 2:
Facilitator of Learning
2.2, 2.3
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 4:
Diversity
Supplemental Text Annotated
Bibliography
Textbook Analysis &
Instructional Plan
Implementation with Video
Critiques
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
4.2 Use a large supply of books,
technology-based information, and
nonprint materials representing
multiple levels, broad interests, and
cultural and linguistic backgrounds.
Outcome 2:
Facilitator of Learning
2.4
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Reading Research Synthesis
Supplemental Text Annotated
Bibliography
Textbook Analysis &
Instructional Plan
Implementation with Video
Critiques
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
4.3 Model reading and writing
enthusiastically as valued lifelong
activities.
Outcome 2:
Facilitator of Learning
3.3
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
Portfolio
4.4 Motivate learners to be lifelong
readers.
Outcome 2:
Facilitator of Learning
2.3
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Outcome 2:
Facilitator of Learning
2.2, 2.3, 2.4
Outcome 2:
Facilitator of Learning
2.1, 2.4
5
Supplemental Text Annotated
Bibliography
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
Portfolio
EDRD 7718
5.1 Display positive dispositions
related to reading and the teaching
of reading.
Outcome 2:
Facilitator of Learning
2.3
Outcome 3:
Collaborative
Professional
3.1, 3.2, 3.3
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Textbook Analysis &
Instructional Plan
Implementation with Video
Critiques
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
Portfolio
5.2 Continue to pursue the
development of professional
knowledge and dispositions.
Outcome 3:
Collaborative
Professional
3.2, 3.4
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Reading Research Synthesis
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
Portfolio
5.3 Work with colleagues to
observe, evaluate, and provide
feedback on each other’s practice.
Outcome 3:
Collaborative
Professional
3.1, 3.4
Standard 1:
Candidate
Knowledge,
Skills &
Dispositions
Reading Research Synthesis
WebCT Discussion &
Classroom Applications
Portfolio Textbook Analysis &
Instructional Plan
Implementation with Video
Critiques
VIII. COURSE REQUIREMENTS/ASSIGNMENTS:
Reading Research Synthesis (15%): Candidates will research the literature on reading in a grade-specific (e.g.,
elementary, middle, high) content area (e.g. science, math, social studies, language arts). Candidates will critically
look at the changing role of reading in this content area, text sources advocated for this content area, and specific
strategies for reading such sources. A synthesis of findings will be presented in a class presentation. Technology
such as PowerPoint is required for this presentation.
Supplemental Text Annotated Bibliography (15%): Candidates will research a wide range of supplemental texts
for student reading in the content areas (grade and subject specific to each teacher) including informational
tradebooks, biographies, fiction, and magazines. Texts should be appropriate for meeting the needs of a diverse
class of learners. Candidates should to take into consideration diversity issues such as gender, second language
learners, and cultural responsiveness. A total of 15 titles will be read and evaluated using criteria such as links to
content, difficulty, and style. Candidates will turn in an annotated bibliography (following a specified format).
Textbook Analysis and Instructional Plan Implementation with Video Critiques (40%): Candidates will choose
a chapter or unit in a content area textbook they use and analyze it using research findings explored in this and
other courses. Candidates will determine the reading support necessary to assist students as they use the
textbook, and they will develop an instructional plan to meet the needs of diverse students, paying attention to the
five dimensions of reading; factors related to the reader, text, and context; and local and national reform in the
teaching of reading in the content areas. Candidates will implement this instructional plan and reflect on its
effectiveness submitting a formal paper that documents the implementation process, results, and research-based
plans for future implementation (3-4) pages following APA (5th edition) guidelines using 12 pt. font and
doublespaced. Two video critiques will be conducted during the implementation. Candidates will provide
feedback to peers on videoed lessons.
WebCT Discussion & Classroom Applications (10%). Throughout this course, you will be asked to reflect on the
readings, experiment with classroom applications, and post your experiences/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 experiences, and to allow time for personal reflection. The focuses
of the discussion prompts and classroom applications 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 (20%). In this class, you will continue to develop your portfolio in which you illustrate your growth and
expertise as a reading teacher. You will compile evidence that illustrates you have met the goals and objectives of
the Reading Endorsement program (See attached objectives, IRA Standards and RPI). 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.
6
EDRD 7718
IX. Evaluation and Grading:
A key assignment from the EDRD 7718: Content Area Reading course is the Textbook Analysis and Instructional
Plan Implementation (with Video Critiques). This assignment is a measure of candidates’ professional and
pedagogical knowledge. It is designed to assess a candidate’s expertise as a facilitator of learning. In this fieldbased project, candidates first choose a unit they will be teaching, analyze the accompanying textbook using
research findings explored in this and other reading courses, and determine the necessary reading support needed
to meet the diverse reading needs of their students. Candidates then develop and implement an instructional plan
based on these findings. During the implementation, candidates will videotape their teaching and critique their
performance. The total project is broken into three sections: textbook analysis, instructional plan, and video
critiques. Candidates must score an “S” on each of the three parts of this project to successfully complete EDRD
7716. If a candidate does not score an “S” in each of these three areas, he/she must meet with the professor and
complete an action plan for successful completion of the project. Faculty who teach the EDRD 7718 course will
use a rubric that is aligned with the Reading Performance Instrument outcomes and proficiencies to evaluate this
project.
Grading Scale:
90 – 100 A
80 – 89 B
70 – 79 C
73 - 78 D
Below 73 F
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 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.
7
EDRD 7718
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.
Week 1
Course Introduction/Syllabus
Thinking about Content Area Reading
Georgia Performance Standards
Week 2
Content Area Literacy
Readings: Chapter 1 (Alvermann) and chapter from Daniels text
Week 3
Language, Diversity, & Culture
Readings: Chapter 2 (Alvermann) and article on ESOL students (Tenio)
Week 4
Learning Environment
Grouping Methods
Readings: Chapter 3 (Alvermann) and article on reading groups (Shannon)
Week 5
Planning for Content Literacy
Readings: Chapter 4 (Alvermann)
Week 6
Assessment of Textbooks
Readings: Chapter 5 (Alvermann) and Mendez article
Due: Supplemental Text Annotated Bibliography
Week 7
Preparing to Read
Readings: Chapter 6 (Alvermann) and chapter from Braunger
Week 8
Reading to Learn
Readings: Chapter 7 (Alvermann) and NRP Report (Comprehension)
Week 9
Word Study
Readings: NRP Report (Phonics & Fluency)
Due: Textbook Analysis and Instructional Plan Implementation
Week 10
Vocabulary
Readings: Chapter 8 (Alvermann) and NRP Report (Vocabulary)
Week 11
Reflecting on Reading
Readings: Chapter 9 (Alvermann) and article on response to reading
Week 12
Writing across the Curriculum
Readings: Chapter 10 (Alvermann)
Due: Video Critiques
Week 13
Studying and Study Strategies
Readings: Chapter 11 (Alvermann)
Week 14
Literature in the Content Areas
Readings: Chapter 12 (Alvermann) and select articles
8
EDRD 7718
Week 15
Technological Considerations
Readings: various articles
Due: Portfolio
XIII. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Allen, J. (1995). It’s never too late: Leading adolescents to lifelong literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Antinarella, J., & Salbu, K. (2003). Tried and true lessons, strategies, and activities for teaching secondary English.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Alvermann, D. E., & Phelps, S. F. (1998). Content reading and literacy (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Anaya, R. (1992). Censorship of neglect. English Journal.
Beers, K., & Samuels, B. (Eds.). (1998). Into focus: Understanding and creating middle school readers. Norwood,
MA: Christopher-Gordon.
Beers, K. (2003). When kids can’t read: What teachers can do. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Blau, S. (2003). The literature workshop: Teaching texts and their readers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Bloem, P., & Padak, N. (1996). Picture books, young adult books, and adult literacy learners. Journal of
Adolescent and Adult Literacy.
Buehl, D. (2001). Classroom strategies for interactive learning. Newark, DE.: IRA.
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.
Cole, A. D. (2004). When reading begins: The teacher’s role in decoding, comprehension, and fluency.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Combs, M. (1997). Developing competent readers and writers in the middle grades. Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Merrill.
Cullinan B., & Galda, L. (1994). Literature and the child. San Diego. Harcourt Brace.
Cullinan, B. (1992). Read to me: Raising kids who love to read. NY: Scholastic.
De Carlo, J. (Ed.). (1995). Perspectives in whole language. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Dornan, R., Rosen, L., & Wilson, M. (1997). Multiple voices, multiple texts: Reading in the secondary content
areas. Portsmouth, NY: Boynton/Cook.
Dudley-Marling, C., & Paugh, P. (2004). A classroom teacher’s guide to struggling readers. Porstmouth, NH:
Heineman.
Duffy, G. G. (Ed.). (1992). Reading in the middle school. Newark, Delaware: IRA.
Ekwall, E. E. (1993). Locating and correcting reading difficulties (6th ed.). Columbus: Merrill.
Ericson, B. (Ed.). (2001). Teaching reading in high school English classes. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Farris, P., Fuhler, C., & Walther, M. (2004). Teaching reading: A balanced approach for today’s classrooms.
Boston: McGraw-Hill.
Filipovic, Z. (1994). Zlata's diary: A child's life in Sarajevo. NY: Scholastic.
Gillet, J., & Temple, C. (2000). Understanding reading problems. NY: Longman.
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.
Harvey, S., & Goudvis, A. (2000). Strategies that work. York, Maine: Stenhouse.
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.
Irvin, J. (1998). Reading and the middle school student. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Jacobson, J. M. (1998). Content area reading: Integration with the language arts. Albany, NY: Delmar.
Johnson, D. (2001). Vocabulary in the elementary and middle school. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Krogness, M. (1995). Just teach me, Mrs. K. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Langer, J. (1992). Literature instruction: A focus on student response. Urbana, IL: NCTE.
Learner, J. (1993). Learning disabilities: Theories, diagnosis, and teaching strategies (6th ed.). Boston: Houghton
Mifflin.
Leggo, C. (1991). The reader as problem-maker: Responding to a poem with questions.
Manzo, A., & Manzo, U. (1997). Content area literacy: Interactive teaching for active learning. NY: Prentice-Hall.
May, F. (2001). Unraveling the seven myths of reading. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Murphy, J. (1996). The great fire. NY: Scholastic.
Newkirk, T. (2002). Misreading masculinity: Boys, literacy, and popular culture. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Nystrand, M. (1993). Using small groups for response to and thinking about literature. English Journal.
Pirie, B. (2002). Teenage boys and high school English. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
Probst. R. E. (1988). Response and analysis: Teaching literature in junior and senior high school. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.
Probst, R. E. (1994). Teaching what we cannot know. Voices from the Middle.
Putnam, L. (Ed.). (1996). How to become a better reading teacher. NY: Prentice-Hall.
9
EDRD 7718
Rasinski, T., & Padak, N. (2000). Effective reading strategies: Teaching children who find reading difficult (2nd ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice Hall.
Reissman, R. (1994). Leaving out to pull in: Using reader response to teach multicultural literature. English
Journal.
Richardson, J., & Morgan, R. (2000). Reading to learn in the content areas. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.
Rinaldi, A. (1993). Wolf by the ears. NY: Scholastic.
Robinson, R., & et.al. (2000). Issues and trends in literacy education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Roe, B., & Smith, S. (2005). Teaching reading in today’s middle school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Ruddell, M. R. (1997). Teaching content reading and writing. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Schoenbach, R., & Greenleaf, C. (1999). Reading for understanding. NY: Jossey-Bass.
Smith, M., & Wilhelm, J. (2002). Reading don’t fix no chevys. 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.
Tonjes, M., Wolpow, R., & Zintz, M. (1999). Integrated content literacy. NY: McGraw-Hill.
Tovani, C. (2004). Do I have to teach reading? Portland, MA.
Vacca, R., & Vacca, J. A. (2000). Content area reading. NY: Longman.
Weaver, C. (2002). Reading process and practice (3rd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Wilhelm, J. D. (1997). You gotta BE the book: Teaching engaged and reflective reading with adolescents. Urbana,
IL: NCTE.
Zirinsky, D., & Rau, S. (2001). A classroom of teenaged readers. NY: Addison Wesley Longman.
10
EDRD 7718