KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
BAGWELL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
READING ENDORSEMENT
Fall 2008
I. COURSE:
Number/section: EDRD 7715/01
Course Title: Theory and Pedagogy in the Study of Reading
II. INSTRUCTOR:
Name:
Office:
Office Phone:
E-mail:
Office Hours:
III. CLASS MEETING:
Campus: Thursday, 5:00 PM – 7:45 PM, KH 1303
WebCT: You will engage in on-line discussions with your peers on concepts related to our topic. Therefore, you are
expected to log onto WebCT daily and engage in these discussions. In addition, all materials for each
session will be posted 24 hours in advance. You are asked to download all materials prior to coming to
class. Minimal handouts will be provided by the faculty.
IV. TEXT & MATERIALS:
Ruddell, R. & Unrau, N. (2004). Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.).Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
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. (Note: This may be obtained at no charge by writing to this address or it is
available on-line.)
V. CATALOG DESCRIPTION:
An advanced study of the socio-psycholinguistic foundations of reading and writing. This course examines theories of
language development and reading acquisition. Candidates will study scientifically-based research in the areas of
phonemic awareness, word identification, phonics, vocabulary, fluency, comprehension and motivation. This course also
explores historical perspectives of reading and reading research and a wide range of instructional practices and
curriculum materials that meet the needs of diverse learners at all grade levels. This course serves as the prerequisite for
the other two courses in the Reading Endorsement.
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.
EDRD 7715 • Fall 2008 • Dr. Toni Strieker
In this course teachers will acquire a background in reading theory/research and terminology used in discussing
language/reading development. They will develop an understanding of the sociological, psychological, and linguistical
factors that underpin reading acquisition and begin exploring a wide array of curricula and instructional practices and
materials that meet the needs of a diverse population of learners at all age levels. After taking this course, teachers
will have a stronger understanding of the reading process including the five dimensions of reading (i.e., phonics,
phonemic awareness, fluency, vocabulary, & comprehension).
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 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.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Are committed to students and their learning.
Know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students.
Are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning.
Think systematically about their practice and learn from experience.
Are members of learning communities.
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 thinking, teaching and learning processes.

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.
2
EDRD 7715

Demonstrates skill in creating a facilitative learning environment.

Demonstrates skill in creating facilitative learning experiences.

Demonstrates professionalism.

Has students who are successful learners.
Use of Technology, Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the 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.
Course Objectives:
1.1 Possesses broad, current and specialized knowledge of reading (e.g., foundations of the
reading/writing process, major components of reading, reading research and histories of reading and
demonstrates this knowledge to colleagues, parents and students.
1.2 Possesses an understanding of the role reading plays in the content areas and accurately represents
understanding through use of multiple explanations, methods, technologies and/or strategies.
(Dispositions)
1.3 Possesses strong pedagogical content knowledge and uses that knowledge to identify approaches to
instructional challenges.
1.4 Possesses an understanding of language development and reading acquisition and cultural and
linguistic factors influencing literacy development.
3
EDRD 7715
The following grid aligns course objectives with NCATE and IRA Professional Reading Standards:
Course Objectives
(From above)
IRA Standards
NCATE
Evidence: Candidate
Performance upon:
1.1
1.1 Demonstrate knowledge of
psychological, sociological, and
linguistic foundations of reading
and writing processes and
instruction.
Standard 1: Candidate
Knowledge, Skills &
Dispositions
Point Counter Point Paper and
Panel Presentation
1.1, 1.3
1.2 Demonstrate knowledge of
reading research and histories of
reading.
Standard 1: Candidate
Knowledge, Skills &
Dispositions
1.4
1.3 Demonstrate knowledge of
language development and
reading acquisition and the
variations related to cultural and
linguistic diversity.
Standard 1: Candidate
Knowledge, Skills &
Dispositions
1.4 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.
Standard 1: Candidate
Knowledge, Skills &
Dispositions
1.1
Reading Theorist Paper
Class Activities
Standard 4: Diversity
Point Counter Point Paper and
Panel Presentation
Reading Theorist Paper
Class Activities
Point Counter Point Paper and
Panel Presentation
Reading Theorist Paper
Class Activities
Point Counter Point Paper and
Panel Presentation
Reading Theorist Paper
Class Activities
VIII. COURSE REQUIREMENTS/ASSIGNMENTS:
Point-Counterpoint: Point-Counterpoint has two steps, one in which you work individually and the other in which you will
work in a groups of 2 or 4.
1:
Candidates will choose one of the five dimensions of reading and examine arguments for and against the
findings of the National Reading Panel as well as recent reform stemming from the Panel findings. Research for
Point-Counterpoint should include at least two scholarly sources (in addition to course readings) for each
position. Synthesize findings in a formal 5-page paper that discusses the implications of the findings reading
instruction for all students, including those learning English and those with disabilites. Be certain to address how
the theory provides the underpinnings of practice and reading programs, currently in use. Use APA (5th edition)
guidelines using 12 pt. font and double-spaced, using the rubrics provided in class. The paper will be evaluated
on the rubric provided in class. (100 Points)
2.
Working in teams of 2 or 4 members, prepare competing dialogues for the Point-Counterpoint Presentation.
(Note: The size of the teams will depend upon the overall enrollment of the class. For example, if twelve people
enroll, then the team size will be 2 and if twenty people enroll, the team size will be 4.) The presentations to the
class must be no longer than thirty minutes. The dialogues and presentation must address the eight elements
of critical thinking and will be evaluated on the CT Rubric. The class will vote on which argument was the most
persuasive and will assess the presentations based upon the elements of critical thinking. At the time of your
presentation, prepare to submit the ppt. as well as the written competing dialogues. (75 Points)
Theory Research Paper & Presentation: This project has two sections.
1.
Theory Research Paper. (75 Points)The first section is a review of the research of a prominent theorist in
reading education. The purpose of this research is for you to examine with considerable depth a topic in reading
education. Early in the term you should define a topic (have it approved by me) and begin reading deeply—
logging notes/writing brief reflections—in research journals. You should plan to read more than you will actually
“cite” in your paper. Your paper should be 8-10 double-spaced pages (Times New Roman 12 font) and should
follow APA guidelines. You must provide sufficient citations and include a reference list of 10-15 sources,
outside your text. Your paper should begin with an introduction and then follow with a review and critique of
related literature. You must submit your research log along with the final paper.
4
EDRD 7715
2.
Research Paper Presentation. (50 Pts.)Using PowerPoint and any additional tools/resrouces, you will make an
oral presentation of your completed research project.
Candidate Self-Evaluation of Meeting IRA Standards (50 points) Teacher conducts self-evaluation on his/her progress
in meeting the IRA standards designated for this course. Self-evaluation must represent thoughtful reflection upon the
standards in concert with class assignments and activities as well as the review of the professional literature.
Online Discussions and In-Class Cooperative Learning. (75 Pts.): Throughout this course, you will be asked to reflect
on the readings and to post your reflections on the class WebCT discussion board. This activity provides us with the
opportunity to share thoughts and ideas with each other, to learn from and about other’s perspectives, and to allow time
for personal reflection. The focuses of the prompts are designed to ensure that your attention is drawn to key elements in
the readings and to encourage reflection on aspects that I consider important to your understanding of the content. Full
credit is given to responses that incorporate reflection, address all components of the prompt(s), and are posted by the
assigned date. In addition to WebCt, there will be a number of cooperative learning activities, including the one that results
in the Point-Counter Point Presentation. The collaboration on that activity is worth 25 points toward your final grade. (Ongoing Due Dates!)
EDRD 7715 is a collaborative course through which we will become a learning community that continuously engages in
cooperative learning and other forms of active intellectual work. We will do a number of in-class activities based upon your
readings and homework assignments. You will be expected to participate through collaboration, questioning, listening,
evaluating, analyzing, verbalizing, and demonstrating. Many in-class activities will be awarded points based on your
participation and the group’s written, oral or visual response to the activity. If you’re not able to participate in the activity
due to not having read an assignment, not having created a lesson/activity or not being in class, etc., you cannot receive
the points. Topics will include, but not be limited to:






Demonstrating critical thinking;
Developing close reading skills in analyzing texts, chapters, articles and essays;
Understanding the interrelated nature of reading theories and instructional practices;
Assessing, analyzing and evaluating student profile data;
Understanding the needs of parents, particularly those who are non native speakers;
Reflecting upon thinking, teaching and learning, and so forth.
IX. Evaluation and Grading:
A = 90 – 100%
B = 80 – 89%
C = 70 – 79%
D = 60 – 69%
Late Work
I will accept late work, but it is your repsonsibility to discuss late work with me prior to the due date. Points will be
deducted from late work. I consider work late if it is not handed in during the assigned class time. NO
EXCEPTIONS. (No computer excuses please.)
Standards for Submission of Assignments
 Make certain that your name is on everything submitted, particularly those on WebCT.
 Along with your name, please include the date and course number
 For paper submissions, secure single sheets of paper—Do not dogear or turn in loose sheets
 Report covers may be used for major assignments---No plastic sleeves for individual sheets of paper
 Type/word process all assignments (crisp, clear printout)
 Edit your work, and when asked, show evidence of peer review.
 Make certain that you self assess on the rubrics provided and submit those with the assignment.
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
5
EDRD 7715
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 Graduate Catalogue. All students are expected to attend
classes in accordance with the scheduled time of the course. Should you be absent, you are responsible for making up
the work missed. In-class activities may not be made up.
XII. COURSE OUTLINE:
What follows is a tentative schedule (subject to change with notice). I have not indicated the dates that readings
from your text are due because I do not know how long it will take for us to learn this content deeply. Reading
assignments and other forms of homework will be on class agendas, posted on WebCt.
Topic
Introduction to Content
- Essential Questions
- Review of Syllabus
My Job in Teaching & Your Job in Learning
- Critical Thinking, Speaking, Listening
- Critical Reading, Writing & Assessing
Activities
Course Requirements Due
Ice Breaker : “Did You Know”
Personal Learning Goals
Logical Analysis of Ruddell & Unrau
Critical Literacy
- The Arts of Close Reading & Substantive
Writing
- Critical Analysis of Texts
In teams of five, follow the guide for critical
thinking to analyze the first section of the
book.
Read handouts by Elder & Paul
(2007) on Critical Thinking.
Read chapters 1-2 Rudell & Unrau
Selection of P-C Topics
The Learner & Their Families
- New Kids in School: How Changing
Demographics Change Teaching
Expression of Personal Reading Theory
Read selected chapters 1, 2, 3
Rudell & Unrau
Development and Sharing of Personal
Reading Theory
Read selected chapters 1, 2, 3
Rudell & Unrau
Language & Literacy Development
Emergent Literacy
Logical Analysis of Article on Emergent
Literacy
Read selected chapters 12-18
Rudell & Unrau
The Learner
Cognitive Processing
Cognitive Proecessing & Reading
Cognitive Processing & Writing
Logical Analysis of Article on Cognitive
Processing
Point of View Exercises
Creating Learner Profiles
- Independent Reader
- Dependent Reader
- Issues related to disabilities
- Issues related to ESOL
Scienctifically Based Reading Research
(SBRR) for Five Dimensions of Reading
Alphabetics
Phonics
Five Dimensions of Reading
Vocabulary
Comprehension
Fluency
Reading Theories
- More on Cognitive Processing Models
- Construction-Integration Models
Read selected chapters 4-9; 40-46
Rudell & Unrau
(9-25-08) Point-Counter Point
Paper Due
Point-Counter Point Presentation
Read selected chapters 4-9
Rudell & Unrau
Point Counter Point Presentation
Read selected chapters 19-25
Rudell & Unrau
Point of View Exercises
Read selected chapters 19-25
Rudell & Unrau
Theorists Paper Due
6
EDRD 7715
Reading Theories:
- Transactional Models
- Individual-Environmental Model
Theorists Presentation
Reading Theories:
- Dual Coding Model
- Attitude-Influence Model
- Sociocognitive Model
- Affective
Theorists Presentation
Role of Assessment in a Learning Culture
Theorists Presentation
Beating the Odds: Instructional Effect on Literacy
Development
Theorists Presentation
Synthesize and application of learnings from
EDRD 7715
Theorists Presentation
Literacy & Technology
Point Counter Point Presentation
Course Wrap-Up
Read selected chapters 47-49
Rudell & Unrau
Read selected chapters 50, 51
31-35
Rudell & Unrau
Read selected chapters 55
Rudell & Unrau
Read selected chapters 36-39
Rudell & Unrau
Read selected chapters 52-54
Theorists Presentation
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Angelillo, J. (2003). Writing about reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Brozo, W., & Simpson, M. (1995). Readers, teachers, learners (2nd ed.). Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Burke, J. (2002). Reading reminders: Tools, tips, and techniques. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
Burkhardt, R. (2003). Writing for real. Westerville, OH: NMSA.
Calkins, L. (2001). The art of teaching reading. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Campbell, R. (2004). Phonics naturally, reading and writing for real purposes. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Cole, A. D. (2004). When reading begins: The teacher's role in decoding, comprehension, and fluency. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Cullinan, B. (1992). Read to me: Raising kids who love to read. New York: Scholastic.
Cullinan, B., & Galda, L. (1994). Literature and the child. San Diego: Harcourt Brace.
Dahl, K., Scharer, P., Lawson, L., & Grogan, P. (2001). Rethinking phonics: Making the best teaching decisions.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Davenport, M. R. (2002). Miscues not mistakes: Reading assessment in the classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Dornan, R., Rosen, L., & Wilson, M. (1997). Multiple voices, multiple texts: Reading in the secondary content areas.
Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook.
Dudley-Marling, C., & Paugh, P. (2004). A classroom teacher's guide to struggling readers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Eldredge, J. L. (2005). Teaching decoding: Why and how. Newark, DE: IRA.
Ellery, V. (2005). Creating strategic readers. Newark, DE: IRA.
Farris, P., Fuhler, C., & Walther, M. (2004). Teaching reading: A balanced approach for today’s
classrooms. Boston:
McGraw-Hill.
Flippo, R. F. (2003). Assessing readers qualitative diagnosis and instruction. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Flood, J. (2005). Literacy development of students in urban schools: Newark, DE: IRA.
Fox, B. (2004). Word identification strategies: Phonics from a new perspective. Newark, DE: IRA.
Freedman, D. E., & Freedman, Y. S. (2004). Essential linguistics: What you need to know to teach
reading, ESL, spelling, phonics, grammar. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Gallis, K. (1994). How children talk, write, draw, dance, and sing their understanding of the world. New York: Teachers
College Press.
Goodman, K. (1996). On reading: A common-sense look at the nature of language and the science of reading.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
7
EDRD 7715
Goodman, Y. M. , & Owocki, G. (2002). Kidwatching: Documenting children's literacy development. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Graves, M. (2001). Teaching reading in the 21st century. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Gunning, T. G. (1996). Creating reading instruction for all children (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Gunning, T. G. (2000). Phonological awareness and primary phonics. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Hammond, B. (2005). Teaching African American learners to read: Newark, DE: IRA.
Harp, B., & Brewer, J. (2004).The informed reading teacher. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
Heilman, A. (1998). Phonics in proper perspective. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Heilman, A., Blair, T., & Rupley, W. (1998).Principles and practices of teaching reading (9th ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Johnson, D. (2001). Vocabulary in the elementary and middle school. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Kamil, M. L., Mosenthal, P. B., Pearson, P. D., & Barr, R. (Eds.). (2000). Handbook of reading
research. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Krashen, S. D. (2003). Explorations in language acquisition and use. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Lenski, S. D., & Nierstheimer, S. L. (2004). Becoming a teacher of reading: A developmental approach. Upper Saddler
River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Lyons, C. A. (2003). Teaching struggling readers how to use brain-based research to maximize learning. Portsmouth,
NH: Heinemann.
Macrorie, K. (1988). The I-search paper. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Mandel, L., Morrow, L., Gambrell, L. B., & Pressley, M. (Eds.). (2003). Best practices in literacy
instruction. Newark, DE: IRA.
May, F. (2001). Unraveling the seven myths of reading. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
McCormick, R., & Paratore, J. (Eds.). (2003). After early intervention, then what? Teaching struggling readers in grades 3
and beyond. Newark, DE: IRA.
McLaughlin, M., & Allen, M. B. (2002). Guided comprehension: A teaching model for grades 3-8. Newark, DE: IRA.
Moore, R., & Gilles, R. (2005). Reading conversations: Retrospective miscue analysis with struggling readers, grades 412. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Mueller, P. N. (2001). Lifers: Learning from at-risk adolescent readers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
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.
Nosich, G. (2005). Learning to Think Things Through: A Guide to Critical Thinking Across the
Curriculum 2nd Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Opitz, M. F., & Rasinski, T. (1998). Good-bye round robin: 25 effective oral reading strategies. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Paul, R., & Elder, L. (2008). Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your learning and your life.
2nd Ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Pinnell, G. S., & Fountas, I. C. (1998). Word matters: Teaching phonics and spelling in the reading/writing classroom.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Power, B., & Hubbard, R. (2001). Language development: A reader for teachers (2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
Prescott-Griffin, M. L. (2005). Reader to reader: Building independence through peer partnerships. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Prescott-Griffin, M. L., & Witherell, N. L. (2004). Fluency in focus: Comprehension strategies for all young readers.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Putnam, L. (Ed.). (1996). How to become a better reading teacher. Columbus, OH: Prentice Hall.
Rasinski, T. (2003). The fluent reader: Oral reading strategies for building word recognition, fluency,
and comprehension. New York: Scholastic.
Rasinski, T., & Padak, N. (2000). Effective reading strategies: Teaching children who find reading difficult (2nd ed.).
Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall.
Rasinski, T., & Padak, N. (2001). From phonics to fluency: Effective teaching of decoding and reading
fluency in the elementary school. Newark, DE: IRA.
Reynolds, M. (2004). I won't read and you can't make me. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Rhodes, L. K. (Ed.). (1992). Literacy assessment: A handbook of instruments. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Robinson, R. (2000). Historical sources in U.S. reading education. 1900-1970: An annotated
bibliography. Newark, DE: IRA.
Robinson, R. (2003). Readings in reading instruction: Its history, theory, and development. Boston,
Allyn & Bacon.
Robinson, R. D., McKenna, M. C., Wedman, J. M., & et.al. (2000). Issues and trends in literacy
8
EDRD 7715
education. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Routman, R. (2002). Reading essentials: The specifics you need to teach reading well. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Ruddell, R., Ruddell, M., & Singer, R. (1994). Theoretical models and processes of reading: Newark, DE: IRA.
Ruddell, R. B., & Unrau, N. (eds.). Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed.).
Newark, DE: IRA.
Santman, D. (2005). Shades of meaning: Comprehension and intrepretation in middle school. Portsmouth, NH.
Schoenbach, R., & Greenleaf, C. (1999). Reading for understanding. New York: Jossey-Bass.
Shinn-Strieker, T., House, G. & Klink, B. (Sept./Oct., 1989) Role of cognitive processing & language development in
emergent literacy. Remedial and Special Education. 10 (5), pp. 43-50.
Shinn-Strieker, T. (Nov. 1986). Patterns of cognitive style in normal and handicapped children. Journal of Learning
Disabilities, 19 (9), pp. 572-576.
Smith, F. (1996). Reading without nonsense (3rd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.
Smith, F. (2003). Unspeakable acts, unnatural practices: Flaws and falacies in scientific reading
instruction. Portsmouth, NH.
Smith, N. B. (2002). American reading instruction. Newark, DE: IRA.
Smith, R. (2005). Teaching reading in today's middle school. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Steineke, N. (2003). Reading and writing together: Collaborative literacy in action. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Strickland, K. (2005). What's after assessment? Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Tompkins, G. E. (2003). Literature for the 21st century (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
Tyner, B. (2004). Small-group reading instruction: A differentiated teaching model for beginning and
struggling readers. Newark, DE: IRA.
Weaver, C. (2002). Reading process and practice (3rd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Wilde, S. (2000). Miscue analysis made easy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
WEBSITES
I Teach; I Learn www.iteachilearn.com
Bilingual Books for Kids: www.bilingualbooks.com
NCTE: http://www.ncte.org
IRA: www.readingonline.org & www.reading.org
NRP 2000: www.nationalreadingpanel.org/Publications/publications.htm
9
EDRD 7715