School For Education Mission StatementThe School for Education at Park University, an institution committed to diversity and best practice, prepares educators to be effective school professionals, reflective change agents, and advocates for equity and excellence for all learners.
School For Education Vision StatementThe School for Education at Park University is to be known as a leader in the preparation of educators who will address the needs, challenges, and possibilities of the 21st century.
Park University School for Education Conceptual Framework
EDE 380 Literacy for ECE & EED Tchrs
FA 2012 HO
Lofflin, Kathy Ehrig
Associate Professor of Education
Ph.D., University of Missouri at Kansas CityM.A., University of Missouri at Kansas CityB.A., Ottawa University
Watson Literacy Center, MA 330A
Tuesdays and Thursdays, 11:30-2:30, and Fridays, 10:00-12:00; available other times by appointment
August 20-December 14
8:45 - 11:25 AM
Admission to Teacher Education, and must be concurrently enrolled in a field practicum course.
ü Fox, Barbara J. (2010). Phonics and structural analysis for the teacher of reading (10th ed.).
Boston: Pearson ISBN-10: 0132611287 | ISBN-13: 9780132611282
ü Vacca, Jo Anne L., Vacca, Richard T., Gove, Mary K., Burkey, Linda, Lenhart, Lisa A., & McKeon,
Christine (2012). Reading and learning to read (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
ü All Park University School for Education candidates seeking a degree in Education (certification and non-certification tracks), must purchase Foliotek, the School for Education’s electronic portfolio system. As purchasing and accessing Foliotek is a multi-step process, please follow these instructions:
1. Decide the Contract Period and fee for which you will be paying. Minimally, you must purchase a contract which extends to the year you expect to graduate, however some students purchase a contract extending one year beyond graduation.
Per Student (Prepaid)
Per Student, Per Year
2. Send an email to Carol Williams (firstname.lastname@example.org) with the following information:
a. Your Name
b. The Contract Period you wish to purchase
c. Your student identification number
d. Note: Students on a non-certification early childhood track, Teaching Young Children or Early Childhood and Leadership, need to request purchase of the NAEYC portfolio).
3. Within a few days, you will receive from Foliotek an email with online purchasing information. Upon receipt of this email, purchase your Foliotek contract.
4. Upon receipt of your payment, you will receive your login information. You must then send a final email to Carol Williams (email@example.com), requesting she provide your current education professors and a academic advisor (list them) access to view your portfolio. It is imperative you complete this final step.
Textbooks can be purchased through the Parkville Bookstore
Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: New understandings about writing, reading, and
learning (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Bell, D., & Jarvis, D. (2002). Letting go of “Letter of the Week”. Primary Voices K-6,
Carlisle, J.F., & Stone, C. A. (2005). Exploring the role of morphemes in word reading.
Reading Research Quarterly, 40(4), 428-449.
Cassidy, J., Garcia, R., Boggs, M. (2005). The SIQ-III test: Gender issues in literacy.
Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 49(2), 142-148.
Clark, K.F. (2004). What can I say besides “sound it out”? Coaching word recognition
in beginning reading. The Reading Teacher, 57(5), 440-449.
Clay, M. M. (2000). Running records for classroom teachers. Portsmouth NH:
Clymer, T. (1963). The utility of phonic generalizations in the primary grades. The
Reading Teacher, 16, 252-258.
DeFord, D. (1985). Validating the construct of theoretical orientation in reading instruction. Reading
Research Quarterly, 20(3), 351-367.
Flippo, R. (2003). Assessing readers: Qualitative diagnosis and instrucion.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Fogel, H., and Ehri, L. C. (2006). Teaching African American English forms to
Standard American English-speaking teachers: Effects on acquisition, attitudes,
and responses to student use. Journal of Teacher Education, 57(5), 464-480.
Fox, M. (2005). Phonics has a phoney role in the literacy wars.
Fry, E. (1977). Fry’s readability graph: Clarifications, validity, and extension to level
17. Journal of Reading, 21(1977), 242-252).
Goodman, D. The reading detective club: Solving the mysteries of reading. Portsmouth,
Knipper, K.J., & Duggan, T. J. (2006). Writing to learn across the curriculum: Tools for
comprehension in content area classes. The Reading Teacher, 59(5), 462-470.
McLaughlin, M., & Allen, M. B. (2002). Guided comprehension in action: Lessons for
grades 3-8. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
McLaughlin, M. (2003). Guided Comprehension in the primary grades. Newark, DE:
International Reading Association.
Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. (2008). Communication
Arts Grade Level Expectations.
International Reading Association & National Council of Teachers of English. (1996).
Standards for the English Language Arts.
National Reading Panel (2001). Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching
children to read.
Palmer, C., & Brooks, M.A. (2004). Reading until the cows come home: Figurative
language and reading comprehension. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy,
Pinnell, G. S. (2004). Ten principles in literacy programs that work.
Raphael, T. , and Au, K. (2005). QAR: Enhancing comprehension and test taking
across grades and content areas. The Reading Teacher, 59(3), 206-221.
Ray, K. (1999). Wondrous words: Writers and writing in the elementary classroom.
Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English."
Ray, K. (2001). The writing workshop: Working through the hard parts (and they’re all
hard parts). Urbana, IL: National Council of Teachers of English."
Ray, K. (2006). Exploring inquiry as a teaching stance in the writing workshop.
Language Arts, 83(3), 238-247.
Richek, M. A. (2005). Words are wonderful: Interactive, time-efficient strategies to
teach meaning vocabulary. The Reading Teacher, 58(5), 414-423.
Stahl, K. (2004). Proof, practice, and promise: Comprehension strategy instruction in
the primary grades. The Reading Teacher, 57(7), 598-609.
Yopp, H.K., & Yopp, R.H. (2000). Supporting phonemic awareness development in the
classroom. The Reading Teacher, 54(2), 130-143.
McAfee Memorial Library - Online information, links, electronic databases and the Online catalog. Contact the library for further assistance via email or at 800-270-4347.Career Counseling - The Career Development Center (CDC) provides services for all stages of career development. The mission of the CDC is to provide the career planning tools to ensure a lifetime of career success.Park Helpdesk - If you have forgotten your OPEN ID or Password, or need assistance with your PirateMail account, please email firstname.lastname@example.org or call 800-927-3024Resources for Current Students - A great place to look for all kinds of information http://www.park.edu/Current/.
The instructor’s philosophy and approach to teaching any professional education course may be summed up in one word: engagement.
Engagement means full involvement by both instructor and students. When someone is engaged, he/she places her/his full attention on the learning task at hand, and is fully “into” the learning activities of the moment rather than thinking about or attending to anything else. She/he consistently pays attention, watches/listens carefully, and works to make the most of every learning opportunity. Neither interruptions nor distractions, nor “just getting by”, is permitted. Learning time is sacred, and important. The instructor is committed to being fully engaged when she is teaching or working with students and their work, and she expects the same engagement level of students when they are in class or working on assignments. Indeed, when students later work in the classroom as teachers, the children they will work with deserve nothing less than full engagement.
The instructor will endeavor to set up the classroom environment to maximize engagement. Some strategies for this will include hands-on activities, cooperative and collaborative learning, a stress on higher level learning outcomes, providing “scaffolding” to help students succeed at their highest ability levels, stressing real-life and cross-disciplinary connections, requiring individual accountability for learning, and facilitating response opportunities for all students. But engagement is not the instructor’s task alone. Taking responsibility for making the most of the learning opportunities of the course will also be expected of each student.
In EDE380, the instructor is first and foremost interested in students becoming effective teachers, and much attention will be paid to various theory-based models that have been found to help children become literate at high levels. The instructor believes that instruction that is not theory-based, and that focuses only on the lowest levels of learning, is neither effective nor appropriate. Thus, she always wants to challenge future teachers to reach for the highest levels of good practice for the children they will teach. Low level learning, or teaching strategies that are not grounded in theory and research, are not good enough for any child. Literacy should be about constructing meaning. If that is not occurring in a classroom, then the literacy instruction there is not effective.
In EDE380, attention will be paid to reflection on what is best practice in literacy, and to a constant assessment of policies and practices that are employed in schools. The instructor does not believe in perpetuating the status quo in literacy instruction just because it may be mandated, funded, or favored by any group with power, including governments, publishers, corporations, professional associations, or any other entity. Each teacher must look at all policies and practices in terms of what is good for students and what is good for their literacy learning. That may differ from what is currently favored in schools, and it may differ from context to context. There is no such thing as “one size fits all,” even though that may be favored by some because it seems to be the easier or less expensive way. It is the professional’s job to be constantly questioning, and making changes when what is happening is not shown to be in children’s best interests. The instructor does not believe that much of the current “status quo” in public school literacy instruction is working in the best interests of children. She does not see it as her job to perpetuate such a flawed status quo; she rather sees it as her job to raise questions about it and to work toward changing the situation for the better. Students in EDE380 should expect to hear many difficult questions raised about what is going on in schools right now, including practices that they will see, and that are accepted, in the school sites where they are having practicum experiences. The instructor expects students to adopt a questioning, reflective attitude toward literacy practice and to work toward changing current practice when it does not meet children’s needs.
What it all boils down to is this: We must be advocates for children. Children always must come first with us, and that means all children, no matter what their backgrounds. That is what advocating for equity means. Advocating for excellence means that we owe it to the children who will be under our care to make sure they have the best opportunity possible to become literate citizens who can participate fully in our society. If there is one theme that should pervade a course such as EDE380, that is it.
Accommodating Special Learning Needs in EDE 380: This theme will pervade all instruction in EDE 380. If we are to advocate for equity and excellence for all learners, we cannot plan instruction with only the needs of the “mainstream” in mind, no matter how familiar or comfortable that might feel. Special needs may involve learning difficulties, but they also may involve areas where learners are different in some way from what is expected of learners who are part of “dominant” groups in the U.S.
Integrating Technology in EDE 380: “New” literacies are now being discussed and researched by literacy educators, and much is now being written about that. Up until a few years ago, little was known, but the field is exploding. Your instructor has been focusing on learning about this new research and will share her learning, and probably some good new information that she is now discovering, with the class throughout the semester.
Impact on K-12 Learning in EDE 380: The Core Assessment assignment in EDE 380 is the Literacy Instructional Module. In the Literacy Instructional Module, documentation of student learning is a required element. There are specific sections of the project that address this; see the project rubrics (to be distributed and discussed in class) to see examples of how this occurs.
Learning Outcomes: Core Learning Outcomes
Assessments for Outcome #1:
Assessments for Outcome #2:
Assessment for Outcome #3:
Assessments for Outcome #4:
Assessments for Outcome #5:
Assessments for Outcome #6:
Assessment for Outcome #7:
Assessments for Outcome #8:
Assessments for Outcome #9:
Link to Class RubricClass Assessment:
1. Homework assignments (66 points possible; 20% of grade)
Readings assigned for each week will usually be due each Tuesday at the beginning of class, unless otherwise noted. For each of the 11 reading assignments from the Vacca text, answer in paragraph form the following three questions covering the reading:
1) What do you think the authors’ purpose(s) were for writing the chapter(s) or articles? Why did they write what they did, and what do you think they hoped to accomplish? In other words, what was the point?
2) What idea(s) in the reading struck you as most useful and why? There is a lot of flexibility possible in your approach to this question. An idea may strike you because it "resonates" with experience, because it seems particularly reasonable or valuable, or because you can easily picture how you would use it in your future classroom.
3) What do you think is the most problematic or controversial idea in the text? What are the issues and views involved and why do you see it as problematic or controversial? If an idea puzzles you or provokes a negative reaction as you read, this would be the place to discuss that, though a negative reaction is not necessary for you to see an idea as problematic or controversial.
NOTE: Writing that you cannot find a problem or controversy will result in a “0” for this portion. You need to “dig” and find something.
For each of the three questions, you will earn a rating of 2, 1, or 0. A "2" will result from a well-developed paragraph, with examples. A "1" will result from a minimally developed paragraph, and a 0 will result from a completely unsatisfactory or missing paragraph. There are 6 total points possible for each assignment.
As you prepare your work, bear in mind that the instructor has two purposes for weekly homework assignments: 1) to make sure that you read and engage with text assignments each week, and 2) to make sure you are engaging with the texts at a fairly high level of thinking. If she is satisfied that these things are happening for you, you will earn a high rating on homework assignments.
There are 11 assignments from the Vacca text (66 total points possible). At the end of the semester, the number of points earned will be compared with the number of points possible, and a percentage will be computed for this portion of the course grade.
Important Notice: For all homework, work turned in one class meeting late will have one point deducted; work turned in two class periods late will have two points deducted. Work turned in later two class meetings after it is due will not be accepted and will not be graded. Work is considered one class period late if it is submitted after midnight on the Tuesday it is due; it is considered two class periods late is it is submitted after midnight on the Thursday after the Tuesday it is due. Work is unacceptable after midnight on the Tuesday one week after the due date.
All homework must be submitted as a Word file to the appropriate Drop Box for the week in the EDE380 eCompanion platform. Points and any comments from the instructor will be posted in the Drop Box.
2. Fox text (225 points possible; 10% of grade)
You should complete all of the Fox text by the date given on the schedule (the Thursday of the fourth week of class). Fill out all the blanks and do all the exercises, reviews, and tests. All 225 pages need to be completed, beginning with the Pretest and ending with the Posttest. For exercises done on separate paper (as instructed in the text), slip the paper in the book at the appropriate point and staple or paper clip the paper to the page. Everything must be completed; in fact, this part of the grade will be based entirely upon completion (pages will be counted and you will receive one point per page). On the due date, a percentage of the total pages that have been completed will be calculated. If all pages are complete and the book is turned in on time, 225 points and a 100% will be recorded. If the book is turned in late, 10% will be deducted for each class meeting that the book is late. Points will be deducted for any missing pages. A page will be considered “missing” if any part of that page is incomplete, so please make sure you have filled in every blank and completed every page.
3. Literacy Instructional Module Rough Drafts (20% of grade)
The Literacy Instructional Module is described in detail below. This module is a major project of EDE380; in fact, it is the course’s “Core Assessment.” As such, it should represent your best work and demonstrate your learning. To that end, the instructor will require that you submit drafts of each of the sections of the project (Parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7). The drafts will be graded on exactly the same standards, and using exactly the same rubrics, as the final drafts, but rough drafts will only be weighted half as much as the final drafts so as to allow you to benefit from instructor input and improve your work for the final draft. If a draft comes in late, it will be reduced 10% for each class period it is late. The instructor will provide plentiful electronic feedback (using marginal comments and the Track Changes function) on these drafts, and students are expected to take that feedback into consideration when revising their work for final submission.
The points possible on each part of the Module are clearly listed on the rubrics, and will be the same for both the rough drafts and the final drafts, but the rough drafts will be worth only half as much as the final drafts toward the final course grade.
All Module drafts must be submitted to the appropriate Dropboxes for the weeks they are due in the EDE380 eCompanion platform. Instructor feedback will be provided through the Dropbox.
4. Literacy Instructional Module (Final draft; 40% of grade)
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF LITERACY INSTRUCTIONAL MODULE PROJECT
Please Note: The Literacy Instructional Module is the “Core Assessment” for EDE380.
The Literacy Instructional Module documents your experience planning, implementing, and assessing two literacy teaching episodes with actual children in your assigned practicum classroom. These teaching episodes should be designed to take place during at least two visits to your practicum site in the second half of the semester. The instruction may take place during regular “literacy” (reading/writing) or Communication Arts time, or it may integrate literacy with a content area such as social studies or science, though literacy must be a major goal of the instruction in these cases.
Plan ahead with your cooperating teacher on the dates, starting during your first visits to the practicum site. During the early weeks of the semester, intensive instruction will be provided in class that is intended to help you have a successful experience and to implement quality instruction..
Detailed rubrics will be provided in class and discussed at length. The final draft will include seven components, which will be discussed in depth in class. The project should have seven separate sections, each posted to Foliotek as a separate artifact and in the designated Dropbox for each section. Each section should cover the elements outlined on that section’s rubric. The instructor will complete an eighth rubric that assesses mechanical aspects for the final drafts. On the rough drafts, input on mechanics will be provided, but grading on mechanics will only occur on the final drafts.
A second rubric, the University’s Core Assessment Rubric, is attached to this syllabus and will be used for University-wide assessment purposes, but not for grading purposes. It is attached at the end of this syllabus for informational and administrative purposes only.
The following description is a brief overview of the project and its seven components; many more details are on the rubrics, and all requirements will be discussed fully in class.
Each Literacy Instructional Module submitted must have the following seven sections fully developed and clearly labeled:
Part 1. Background information on the teaching situation is provided in essay form.
Here, you will be researching information on the school, the classroom, and the specific students you will teach. You also will be expected to discuss how school factors, classroom factors, and student factors will affect your planning to teach each specific module.
Part 2. Learning Outcomes/Objectives are specified and aligned with standards.
In this section you will be writing 2-7 outcome statements specific to the module lessons you will teach, and you will be aligning each outcome with state and national literacy standards (information will be provided in class). The content of these outcomes/objectives should be negotiated with the practicum cooperating teacher in advance of teaching.
Part 3. An appropriate instructional plan to meet the outcomes is presented.
You will need to outline, before you teach the module, plans for instruction that will meet the learning outcomes/objectives you specified in Part 2 above. You will be planning and developing two lessons incorporating two different theory-based literacy teaching models. Part 3 must include two separate lesson plans, one for each model you select. You MUST select your two models from the list below:
All of these models will be fully discussed in class, and also will be demonstrated by the instructor early in the semester. In general, select from the above list. These are models that are theory-based, adaptable to many contexts and student populations, and fairly easy for a beginning teacher to implement. Sometimes, there are those students who would like to select a model not on the list. Although I recommend sticking with the list, especially if you lack teaching experience, if you cannot find two models on the list above that you believe suit your students’ needs, you may research a model on your own and bring the information you have researched to the instructor. If you do this, you may get your alternative choice ONLY from one of the following three sources:
Alternative selections must be discussed and approved by the instructor well in advance of the draft due date, so that the instructor will be able to evaluate the model’s appropriateness for your students and the instructional outcomes you are working toward. The source must be clearly documented in your draft.
The following kinds of activities will absolutely NOT be approved by the instructor for this project:
Once the two theory-based activities are included, you are free to add other things of your choice to your module, but be sure all activities are meaningful and student-centered, and really build literacy.
We will organize this section around a standard “Lesson Plan Outline.” Incorporating this format is required, even though integrating it may seem a bit awkward and redundant at times. We will discuss the ways to do this sensibly, and we will review the format, in class.
Please note that the Lesson Plan Outline requires, among other things, that you document:
It is very important that the above elements be a part of your instruction. It can be difficult to think about these concerns, but we will discuss them in class, and you must stretch your views of teaching to incorporate them. Willingness to push one’s comfort zone and go beyond the obvious are important teaching dispositions.
Part 4. A strategy for assessing the outcomes of instruction is included.
This portion describes how you will document whether your students met the outcomes in Section #2 above. This portion must be completed in advance, before you teach the module. It is required that each of your two plans includes examples of at least one tangible artifact that will demonstrate and assess student learning, and that you have a method for assessing that artifact, preferably something you can attach to examples of student work. Non-tangible assessments like “participation” or “observation” will not be sufficient, unless you have a clear and concrete method for documenting and “capturing” those things. We will discuss possibilities in class.
Part 5. The implementation of the instruction is documented.
This part is your anecdotal report of what actually happened when you implemented your plan. In most cases, you will have to alter your plan “in-flight”; document those alterations in this section. You will not be penalized for instruction not going according to plan; it is better to make adjustments than to go on with instruction that is not working. Think of this as the “after” report of Part 3, your plan.
Part 6. Student learning is documented.
Here, you return to your Outcomes from Section #2 and your Assessment Strategy from Section #4, and you present the evidence of learning that your Assessment Strategy provided. You will not be penalized if students do not meet the outcomes, but you will be for failure to discuss and account for that. You will need to clearly show in a visual display (e.g., a graph or chart) and an explanatory narrative your students’ learning based on the data you gathered. You will be expected to discuss strategies for helping the students meet the outcomes in the future. A representative sample of student work, along with any assessment instruments you created and used to assess the work, should be included and referred to here. For this section, think in terms of a clear, concise, and relatively straightforward description of what your students learned (or did not learn, if that is the case). Save reflections about your own learning for Section 7, below. Think of Part 6 as the “after” report of Part 4, your assessment plan.
Part 7. The teacher is able to think reflectively about instruction.
In this final section, you reflect in depth on your own learning as a result of teaching the module. Specific areas that need to be developed in this short essay are outlined in the grading rubric; all listed areas must be specifically addressed.
8. The work is mechanically acceptable.
Professional-looking, correctly written work is required of all teachers; a section delineating areas that will be assessed is included as “Part 8” on the instructor’s grading rubric. This part of the rubric will be an overall assessment and does not require its own separate, labeled section. There is nothing you need to submit for this part of the module. This section will only be officially scored for the final draft, though the instructor will provide editing assistance and suggestions on the rough drafts.
Please note the following:
5. Final: Reflective pieces linking the completed Literacy Instructional Module with the Missouri Standards for Professional Educators, to be written late in the semester in lieu of a final exam (Completion grade, 10% of grade)
At the end of the semester, students will be writing reflective pieces linking the completed Literacy Instructional Module with the Missouri Standards for Professional Educators. Complete instructions will be given to students just prior to the date of writing. The idea of this assignment is to help you turn the Literacy Instructional Module from a course assignment into a substantial portfolio artifact that you can use to demonstrate that you have mastered several of the Missouri Standards for Professional Educators, and that you can proudly include as a major element of the assessment portfolio you will be required to submit for graduation to the School for Education. The Literacy Instructional Module can potentially be one of your strongest portfolio artifacts and could be used as evidence for a number of the Missouri Standards for Professional Educators. Information on these standards will be provided in class, and possible links between the Literacy Instructional Module will be discussed, though ultimately it will be your responsibility to decide which standards your work best demonstrates. In the reflective pieces you will describe your module and the context in which you implemented it. You will then specify which standards you believe your work demonstrates and will write a justification for each standard you specify. The instructor will use the same School for Education portfolio rubric that will later be used to evaluate your graduation portfolio to evaluate the reflective pieces you write for the Literacy Instructional Module. Grading will be based on timely completion only, and the instructor will provide extensive feedback, which you should find useful for revising this portion of your portfolio prior to final submission during student teaching.
Each of the requirements listed below will result in a percentage grade. Each of the items will be weighted as indicated in parentheses below. Each percentage will be weighted and a course average calculated to determine the final course grade.
Note: This is the “Core Assessment” for EDE380.
Further details about these projects are provided below, and much more information will be provided in class.
Late Submission of Course Materials:
Policies differ for each type of assignment; each assignment is fully described later in this document.
Please do not make excuses for late work; rather, professionals act proactively to prevent problems, and when they are completely unavoidable, they present a plan rather than an excuse. This is related to professional dispositions.
Classroom Rules of Conduct:
Reading: Read syllabus carefully on your own.
Assignment: Start on Fox text immediately. Make a plan for timely completion. Due date is September 13.
The Literacy Instructional Module
Homework due: Vacca, Ch. 1 and 2. Just skim Chapter 1, but do chapter questions for Chapter 2 (as described on pp. 22-23 in this document and as explained in class). Reminder: Readings will always be due on Tuesdays, starting this week. Submit all homework in the appropriate EDE380 eCompanion Drop Box for the week..
Reading the words: Part 1
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 7 (Note: We will be skipping around in the Vacca text, so please pay close attention to chapter numbers for each week!)
Reading the words: Part 2
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 8
Assignment due: Completed Fox text due Sept. 13.
Constructing Meaning: Part 1
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 9
Draft of Part 1 of Literacy Instructional Module (Background Information) due September 20.
Constructing Meaning, Part 2
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 10
Multiple Literacies and “New” Literacies
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 11
(October 15-19 is Fall Recess; classes will not meet that week.)
Assessing Literacy Outcomes
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 6
Assignment due: Draft of Literacy Instructional Module Parts 2 (Outcomes/Objectives) and 3 (Instructional Plan) due October 11.
Assessing Literacy Strengths and Needs
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 14
Assignment due: Draft of Literacy Instructional Module Part 4 (Assessment Plan), due October 25.
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 4.
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 5
Literacy Programs and
Homework due: Questions for Vacca, Ch. 13
Assignment due: Drafts of Literacy Instructional Module Parts 5, 6, and 7 due November 15.
(Note: No class on Thursday, November 22, Thanksgiving Day.)
Miscue Analysis Workshop
Miscue analysis Workshop: continued
Reflecting on professional issues:
Assignment Due: Final drafts of all seven parts of the Literacy Instructional Module due December 6. Please post your Literacy Instructional Module as seven separate documents in the seven designated Final Draft Dropboxes.
Scheduled Final is Thursday, December 13,
8:00-10:00. Arrangements for that day will be discussed in class as the term progresses.
The final, which will consist of portfolio reflective pieces linking the completed Literacy Instructional Module with the Missouri Standards for Professional Educators, must be posted to the designated Dropbox no later than midnight on December 13.
Important: No course work will be accepted after that date and time.
Academic Honesty:Academic integrity is the foundation of the academic community. Because each student has the primary responsibility for being academically honest, students are advised to read and understand all sections of this policy relating to standards of conduct and academic life. Park University students and faculty members are encouraged to take advantage of the University resources available for learning about academic honesty (www.park.edu/current or http://www.park.edu/faculty/).from Park University 2011-2012 Undergraduate Catalog Page 95-96
Plagiarism:Plagiarism involves the use of quotations without quotation marks, the use of quotations without indication of the source, the use of another's idea without acknowledging the source, the submission of a paper, laboratory report, project, or class assignment (any portion of such) prepared by another person, or incorrect paraphrasing. from Park University 2011-2012 Undergraduate Catalog Page 95From the course instructor: You really only hurt yourself when you steal another's work or take short cuts. Your learning will suffer. Plagiarism is a serious offense for these reasons, but also because it denigrates the work of those who did put out the effort, and betrays the trust inherent in the student-teacher relationship. In cases where plagiarism/cheating is discovered, I will certainly do the following:
• The offense will be reported to the Department Chairperson for your major and to the Dean of the School for Education.
• A conference will be held to resolve the matter.
Based on the outcome of the conference, one of the following will also occur:
•A failing grade for the course will be given.
•A zero for the specific assignment will be given.
•The work must be redone in a timely fashion under conditions that will not allow plagiarism or cheating (i.e., closely supervised).
•The matter will be referred to administrators for a determination of consequences.
Attendance Policy:Instructors are required to maintain attendance records and to report absences via the online attendance reporting system.
Park University 2011-2012 Undergraduate Catalog Page 98From the course instructor: More importantly even than all of the above, your attendance is required because it is essential to your learning. Try not to miss even a single day. We will cover much material, plus, many activities involve cooperative work and teacher demonstrations that can never really be replaced. Shoot for perfect attendance, and do what it takes to make that happen.
Because I believe attendance is an important component of the course, but also because I know that humans and their lives are not always perfect, I do have an attendance policy of my own for this class. Here it is:
1. One absence will be excused, no questions asked. Do not use this if you can avoid it. Save it for those unexpected things that come up.
2. A second absence will be excused for any of the following reasons:
• Minor illness
• Child care problems
• Car trouble, other transportation problems
• Unavoidable doctor/dentist appointments (try hard to schedule otherwise)
• Other cases at the instructor's discretion
Please notify the instructor in advance if possible. Get these kinds of problems dealt with. Conscientious students (and teachers) always have backup plans. I will not excuse this type of absence indefinitely--just once.
If you have a third absence not related to the "unconditional" excuses below, your course grade will be reduced by one letter. If you have three more, the grade will be reduced by two letters, and so on. Passing the class implies, at the very least, that you had the contact hours.
3. The following absences will be excused unconditionally (documentation needed):
• Your hospitalization
• Serious illness of a close family member
• Natural disasters, fires, etc.
• Jury duty
• Military call-up (unexpected)
• Death in the family
• Athletic events for Park athletes on the team
• Professional education conferences (must clear in advance with instructor)
NOTICE TO ATHLETES: I must have personal notification from you, face-to-face, in advance of absences due to athletic events. No absences for practices will be excused. I will check absences against communications from coaches. Any work that is due on a day you will be gone is due before you go, or you may give it to a fellow student to hand in that day. If it's not in, the late work policy as stated in this syllabus will be followed.
If you do have to be absent, regardless of the reason, you are responsible for making up the work. The instructor will not provide notes or tutorials for missed class meetings except for the most unusual sorts of circumstances. The best strategy is to find a few classmates you can trust early in the semester, exchange phone numbers and e-mails, and make a plan about what to do in case of unavoidable absences. Note: For the two excused absences, any assignments are due immediately (the first class period you are back in class) upon your return. For unexcused absences, the work will be reduced as would any late work (see section below on LATE SUBMISSION OF COURSE MATERIALS as well as specifics under each assignment in the GRADING PLAN section below).
4. The following absences will never be excused:
• "I have to go to work." Don't schedule work during class time! You should also not come late or leave class early for work.
• "We planned a trip/a wedding/an event six months ago." Don't plan that way. If class doesn't take top priority, make plans to take the class another semester.
• "I have to get to another class." Again, don't double-schedule, and allow clearances.
• "My child (or other family member) has an event at school (or elsewhere)." That's what the one "no questions asked" absence is for. Plan ahead and save it for that if you know it's coming. Do not plan on more than one excused absence for events such as these.
• Any absence that will occur repeatedly on a regular basis, no matter what the reason. Do not plan on the instructor excusing repeated absences.
• Anything else that is really avoidable. Always check with the instructor first. Don't assume.
5. Tardiness policy: Tardiness is distracting and disrespectful to the class and to the instructor, and many times important information is given during the first few minutes of class. Promptness is very important for teachers, and is very important to your instructor. Therefore, the following policy will be followed:
• Tardiness will be recorded if you enter the classroom after the instructor has finished taking roll. The instructor will take roll promptly at 8:45, so it is best to be in the classroom at least five minutes early. That means you are in the classroom (not in the halls or in the smoking area). If just your property (e.g., books, coat) is in the classroom but not you, then you are still tardy. Tardiness will be determined based upon the time on the instructor's watch, not students' watches.
• Three tardies will equal one absence, no matter what the reason. The few that are excused should account for the rare occasions when a tardy is unavoidable. Do NOT plan to be tardy on a regular basis. The times courses meet are well publicized in advance, so you should make advance arrangements for family and job responsibilities in such a way that you are not late for class. If you expect those responsibilities to cause tardiness on a regular basis, don't take this course now.
• Since only two absences will be excused, that means that a total of six tardies will lead to a grade reduction of one grade level. If the student also has absences, however, fewer tardies will be excusable. For example, a student could receive a grade reduction if she or he has one absence and four tardies.
• Tardiness also extends to returning from class breaks on time. There will be one ten-minute break around the middle of each class session. Please return in ten minutes or a tardy will be counted.
These measures may seem strict, but dependability and priority setting are important teacher dispositions, and need to be developed by professionals.
Disability Guidelines:Park University is committed to meeting the needs of all students that meet the criteria for special assistance. These guidelines are designed to supply directions to students concerning the information necessary to accomplish this goal. It is Park University's policy to comply fully with federal and state law, including Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, regarding students with disabilities. In the case of any inconsistency between these guidelines and federal and/or state law, the provisions of the law will apply. Additional information concerning Park University's policies and procedures related to disability can be found on the Park University web page: http://www.park.edu/disability .
Allington, R. L. (2002). Big Brother and the National Reading Curriculum: How
ideology trumped evidence. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Bear, D.R., Invernizzi, M., Templeton, S., & Johnston, F. (2004). Words their way:
Word study for phonics, vocabulary, and spelling instruction (3d ed.). Upper
Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.
Clay, M. (1991). Becoming literate: The construction of inner control. Portsmouth,
Dahl, K.L., Scharer, P.L., Lawson, L.L., Grogan, P.R. (2001). Rethinking phonics:
making the best teaching decisions. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Davenport, M. R. (2002). Miscues not mistakes: Reading assessment in the classroom.
Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y. S. (2000). Teaching reading in multilingual classrooms.
Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y.S. (2001). Between worlds: Access to second language
acquisition. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Freeman, D. E., & Freeman, Y.S. (2004). Essential linguistics: What you need to know
to teach reading, ESL, spelling, phonics, grammar. Portsmouth, NH:
Goodman, K. (1998). In defense of good teaching: What teachers need to know about
the “Reading Wars”. York, ME: Stenhouse.
Goodman, Y., Watson, D. J., & Burke, C. L. (1987). Reading miscue inventory:
Alternative procedures. New York: Richard C. Owen.
Goodman, Y. M., Watson, D. J., & Burke, C. L. (2005). Reading miscue inventory:
From evaluation to instruction. Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen.
Goodman, Y., & Marek, A. (1996). Retrospective miscue analysis: Revaluing readers
and reading. Katonah, NY: Richard C. Owen.
Guthrie, J. L. (2004). Teaching for literacy engagement. Journal of Literacy Research,
Hughes, M., & Searle, D. The violent e and other tricky sounds: Learning to spell from
kindergarten through grade 6. York, ME: Stenhouse.
Liang, L., & Dole, J. (2006). Comprehension: comprehension instructional frameworks.
The Reading Teacher, 59(8), 742-753.
Morrow, L. M., Gambrell, L. B., & Pressley, M. (2003). Best practices in literacy
instruction (2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
Owocki, G., & Goodman, Y. (2002). Kidwatching: Documenting children’s literacy
development. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Owocki, G. (2003). Comprehension: Strategic instruction for K-3 students.
Parsons, L.T. (2006). Visualizing worlds from words on a page. Language Arts, 83 (6),
Pinnell, G.S., & Fountas, I.C. (1998). Word matters: Teaching phonics and spelling in
the reading/writing classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Pressley, M. (2002). Reading instruction that works: The case for balanced teaching
(2nd ed.). New York: Guilford.
Ray, K. (2002). What you know by heart: How to develop curriculum for your writing
workshop. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Ray, K. (2004). About the authors: Writing workshop with our youngest writers.
Sadoski, M. (2004). Conceptual foundations of teaching reading. New York: Guilford.
Sipe, L. , and McGuire, C. (2006). Young children’s resistance to stories. The Reading
Teacher, 60(1), 6-13.
Taylor, D. (1997). Many families, many literacies: An international declaration of
principles. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Wheeler, R. S., & Swords, R. (2006). Code-switching: Teaching standard English in
urban classrooms. Urbana IL: National Council of Teachers of English.
Last Updated:8/9/2012 4:13:18 PM