Reading Specialist Programs

ED 675

Ed. 675 Reading and Cognition Reading Specialist Programs 2011

Course dates/times: Tuesday, January 11 – April 26 4:15 – 6:15 followed by online response.

Instructor: Mary Claire Tarlow, Ph.D. Program Assistant: e-mail: [email protected] Michelle Moffitt Address: School of Education, University of Alaska Southeast Phone: 796-6050 11120 Glacier Highway Juneau, AK 99801-8671 Fax: 796-6549 Office Hours: Tues, Weds 1 – 3; Office: (907) 796-6435 Fax: (907) 796-6059

COURSE DESCRIPTION: Designed as the third in a sequence of courses focused on the theories and processes of reading. Its main emphasis is on the connection between thinking and reading, and between the processes of reading, writing, listening, speaking, and viewing. The social-emotional aspects of reading and the ways people respond to written text are also main features of this course. 3-credit hours.

PREREQUISITES: ED 674

REQUIRED COURSE TEXTS:

Judith Westphal Irwin, (2007) Teaching Reading Comprehension Processes, 3nd Ed., Prentice Hall,

Ellin Oliver Keene and Susan Zimmermann, (2007). Mosaic of Thought: The Power of Comprehension Strategy Instruction, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann, (OR Miller, Debbie, (2002) Reading with Meaning: Teaching Comprehension in the Primary, Portland, Maine: Stenhouse Publishers)

Edwardson, Debby Dahl. (2009) Blessing’s Bead. Farrar, Straus & Giroux

TEXTS FROM 671 AND 674 THAT WE WILL USE : Ruddell, Robert B. and Unrau, Norman J. (Eds.) (2004) Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading 5th Ed. Newark, DE: International Reading Association

Weaver, Constance. (2002) Reading Process and Practice 3rd Ed. Portsmouth, NJ: Heinemann

SELECTED READINGS: (Provided in Resources) Smith Frank, “Demonstrations, Engagement, and Sensitivity” ED 675

Lipson, M.Y. (1983) The Influence of Religious Affiliation on Children's Memory for Text Information. Reading Research Quarterly, 18;4 (448-457).

Steffensen, M.S., Joag-Dev, C. & Anderson, R.C. (1979) A Cross-Cultural Perspective on Reading Comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly 15;1 (10-29).

Caplan, "Style Study: One ...”

Austin, “Beyond Sentence Combining”

McKeown, “Questioning the author”

Dewitz & Dewitz, “They can read the words, but…”

TECHNOLOGY COMPONTENTS/COMPETENCIES EXPECTED: This course requires internet access and connectivity. Threaded discussion via computer will be required, as well as on-line simultaneous class discussion. The course also makes use of UASOnline.

ALIGNMENT MATRIX C

( Assessment Ensuring that S G o S C r a t m t o r a

Course Objective S the Objective has been met m a a n S M n p P n e d c e O d e e e A d s u w E t a p t a

a o e , t r

The candidate will demonstrate r t r u n d d e k a c

the knowledge and skills l i necessary to: 1. Demonstrate and apply an understanding 1. Develop a critical analysis of of reading as a language process. 4 1.1-1.4; 1.1; 2.2 reading process as it relates to 3.1, 3.2 theories of reading and cognition studied in class. 4. Actively participate in all on-line discussions and class sessions. Read and respond to course readings. 2. . Demonstrate an understanding of 1. Develop a critical analysis of comprehension as a complex thinking 4 1.1-1.4 1.1; 2.2 reading process as it relates to process which involves metacognitive, theories of reading and cognition micro, macro, integrative and elaborative studied in class. processes. 4. Actively participate in all on-line discussions and class sessions. Read and respond to course readings. 3. Demonstrate an understanding of the 2. Develop a case study of an interaction and transactions between reader, 4 1.1-1.4; 1.1; 2.2 atypical reader and relate findings the text and the context to perceive reading 3.1 to theories/research of reading and as a process of constructing meaning through cognition. the interaction of the reader’s existing 4. Actively participate in all on-line knowledge, the information suggested by the discussions and class sessions. written language, and the context of the Read and respond to course reading situation readings. 4. Recognize patterns of variation among 2. Develop a case study of an typical and atypical readers. 3 1.1-1.4; 1.1, 1.3; atypical reader and relate findings 4.1 to theories/research of reading and cognition. ED 675 4. Actively participate in all on-line discussions and class sessions. Read and respond to course readings. 5. Apply knowledge of theory to reading 3. Write a self-reflection about what instruction. 5 1.1-1.4; 2.2, 2.3 you have done instructionally in 3.1, 3.3 relation to what we have studied, and what you plan to do in the future. 4. Actively participate in all on-line discussions and class sessions. Read and respond to course readings.

RELATIONSHIP OF THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK TO STANDARDS An increasing emphasis on professional standards for educators reinforces the relevance of the School of Education’s vision of an informed, reflective and responsive professional educator as the grounding tenants of our Conceptual Framework. As the lists of expected achievement indicators, competencies, and dispositions issued by government and professional groups become more extensive, only an informed professional who actively reflects on his/her teaching and is responsive to student, family and community needs will be capable of meeting the intent of those standards. The general theme of our vision is that each of these areas strives to nurture and prepare professional educators so that they can meet the needs of diverse learners. Efforts include continuous endeavors to creatively incorporate technology throughout individual subject area fields, promoting understanding and appreciation for diversity, and support of the development of literacy skills needed in an increasingly complex society.

BASIS FOR STUDENT EVALUATION:

Performance Percent Due Date

1. Analysis of Reading Process Components 30% 4/19/2011 2. Case Study of Atypical Reader 25% 4/22/2011 3. Self-Reflection 15% 4/26/2011 4, Attendance/ Active Participation 30% ED 675

EXPLANATION OF ASSIGNMENTS

Written Style Requirements: American Psychological Association (APA)

Performance Assessment #1: Reading Process Analysis

Option 1: Essay 1. Define the major components of reading & how they are integrated into fluent reading. Be as specific as possible. (Note: These are the components of the act/process of reading---not the teaching of reading). Be sure to include: Comprehension

i. The text 1. Word level

2. Sentence level; inter-sentence level 3. Text level; within text structure

ii. The reader 1. Acquisition & decoding

2. Schema; background knowledge 3. Connections

4. Linguistic knowledge; organizing immediate meaning 5. Formulating the essence; synthesis; analysis of message

6. Metacognitive awareness 7. Engagement; affective

iii. Interaction of reader and text fluency

2. Identify best practice in terms of the major components of reading. This discussion should include Kindergarten through 12th grade.

Option 2: Creative essay You are a tour guide. Take your group on two tours: 1. A tour of the reader’s functioning brain while reading. Explain all of what is happening for this process to occur. ED 675 2. A tour of the reader’s reading-instruction experiences (over time) with effective reading instruction from K to 12. You can combine these tours if you wish.

Option 3: Computer-based presentation Using power-point or imovie (or moviemaker), create a presentation of Option #1 or Option #2 above. Be sure the content is present but also make it interesting and entertaining. ED 675 Reading Process Analysis RUBRIC ED 675 Reading and Cognition 2011

Not Acceptable Acceptable Target Score Knowledge of Understanding of •Demonstrates •Understanding of Course Engagement adequate understanding Engagement Content/ Elaboration of Engagement Elaboration Understanding Macroprocess Elaboration Macroprocess of Reading Microprocess Macroprocess Microprocess Process Metacognitive Microprocess Metacognitive Process Process Metacognitive Process within comprehension within within comprehension processing is accurate, comprehension processing. and extensive in detail. processing is not •Demonstrates •Demonstrates extensive and/or knowledge of understanding of accurate. comprehension as an comprehension as a interaction of thinking complex interaction of and language thinking and language •Demonstrates •Demonstrates knowledge of the understanding of the transactions between transactions between the the reader, the text and reader, the text and the the context context •Descriptions demonstrate distinct depth of understanding.

Implementatio •Discussion of Discussion of Meets expectations and n appropriate instruction is: goes beyond, for instruction does • clearly related to the example: not relate to components of reading • Discussion might be components cognition discussed in insightful, detailed, and (above) in logical class. rich. way. • clearly justified in •Plans for •Discussion of relation to principles of implementation of appropriate instruction discussed in change might be precise instruction lacks class. and/or enterprising, and depth, accuracy, or reflect reliance on strong, support from justifiable, and clear course work beliefs

At all levels • Fails to relate • Relates content and • Relates content and content and implementation to implementation to all implementation to various developmental developmental levels. all developmental levels. levels. Clarity and Organization or All writing is organized, Writing is effective in its Conventions conventions issues in cohesive and almost free of organization, sentence writing distract the spelling or punctuation fluency, conventions to reader from the errors. communicate effectively. ED 675 content.

ED 675 Reading and Cognition

Case Study Paper

Develop a case study of an atypical reader and relate findings to theories/research of reading and cognition. Include engagement, elaboration/inference, microprocesses, macroprocesses, and metacognitive processes in your analysis of the student.

Choose a student for your case study. This student should be an atypical reader. Atypical may refer to the level (low or high) or the manner of processing the reader uses when reading. Give this student a fictitious name in your case study.

Describe the student in terms of the student’s developmental level, culture, language knowledge/level, home support, family structure, social skills, etc.

Describe the student’s interests inside and outside of school.

Describe the student’s reading ability in terms of strengths and weaknesses before you began the semester. (Note: Do NOT cite test scores unless the scores are descriptive of the student’s reading process).

Describe the activities you have done with the student during the semester related to reading and reading comprehension. What did you model? For what strategies did you give explicit instruction? How did the student react to these activities?

What would you plan for future sessions with this case study student? What should the student practice on his/her own? What should the teacher do in her/his continued work with the student?

What have you learned through working with this student that you would like to share with other teachers? ED 675 Case Study Scoring Guide ED 675 Reading and Cognition

Not Acceptable Acceptable Target Description of  Some contextual  Demographic and •Demographic and Student information given contextual information contextual information but insufficient to sufficient for reader to sufficient for reader to consider influence visualize home, get clear understanding on student’s personality, learning- of home, personality, learning. style, cultural learning- style, cultural influences influences Analysis of  Might analyze the  Analyzes the reader's Carefully analyzes student reader's patterns in patterns in terms of student’s patterns in terms of some of microprocesses, terms of microprocesses, the processes macroprocesses, macroprocesses, studied, but might elaboration and elaboration and not examine all of metacognitive metacognitive processes the major processes processes Demonstrates deep  Interactions and  Demonstrates an understanding and transactions understanding of the synthesis of course between the reader, importance of the material the text and context interactions and Examples clearly for this particular transactions between explicate understanding reader may be the reader, the text and of content and its partially analyzed the context for this applications or unclear particular reader.

Activities done  Examples and  Provides descriptions,  Writer provides with student evidence are absent examples and evidence descriptions, during or weak of lessons chosen with examples and semester discussion of evidence of lessons. related to ED assessment of learning making connections 675 and instructional to course content choices. and development in reading for choices. Plan for future • Little or no  Describes an  Describes in depth (or possible discussion of what instructional plan instructional plan future) sessions instruction is indicated indicated by previous indicated by for future sessions. progress and current previous progress reading status. and current reading status. Reflection— • Reflection is vague,  Reflection is focused,  Reflection is What you have off-topic or missing. and specific. focused, specific and learned shows depth of thinking. Clarity and Organization or conventions All writing is organized, Writing is effective in its Conventions issues in writing distract the cohesive and almost free of organization, sentence reader from the content. spelling or punctuation errors. fluency, conventions to communicate effectively. ED 675 ED 675 ED 675

Assignment Description Self-Reflection and Self-Reminder

Reflect on your own practice relative to what you have studied in ED 675 this semester. Identify which elements of the reading process you teach/facilitate learning now and what instructional techniques you use to teach/facilitate them. Identify what you would like to add or change in the future and what you have considered that you choose to not implement in your practice and why.

This paper should reflect what you have learned in this course and how you have applied (or plan to apply) it to your own practice.

If you are not a classroom teacher, write this paper as though you are. Choose a grade level. ED 675

University of Alaska Southeast Reading Specialist Programs ED 675 Reading and Cognition 2011

Self-Reflection and Self-Reminder RUBRIC

Not Acceptable Acceptable Target Score Reflections Reflections do not have Statements reflect that Statements reflect relate to course evident connection to the candidate has considered clear understanding content studied in the course elements in of content of content (Depth) course. connection with own course, with experience. references given. Reflections Reflections do not extend Statements relate to all Statements relate cover all to all elements of reading elements discussed in to all elements of as discussed in the course: engagement, reading discussed elements of course. inference, elaboration, in course in course content metacognition, effective, (Breadth) macroprocesses and coordinated microprocesses. manner, demonstrating an understanding of the whole as well as the parts. Reflections are Statements are general Statements reflect Statements are personal and and abstract or vague. personal consideration clearly specific to and application to the author and the practical candidate’s teaching author’s situation. professional situation. Identifies what Change is either not Author selects teaching Author provides wants to do addressed, or is not well areas to try new strong rationale for described or well techniques that will why areas for differently or justified. improve reading change are add in future instruction identified. Identifies what Choices are either not Author identifies choice Author provides would not be addressed, or are not well of areas to either ignore strong rationale for described or well or put off for future. why areas are implemented justified. identified. Organization Organization or All writing is organized, Writing is effective and conventions issues in cohesive and almost free in its organization, writing distract the reader of spelling or punctuation sentence fluency, Conventions from the content. errors. conventions to communicate effectively. ED 675 ED 675 Reading and Cognition Participation and Reflective Writing

Rubric

Unacceptable Acceptable Target

Less than 2 postings 2-3 postings distributed 3-4 postings well Discussion somewhat distributed or throughout the week. distributed throughout the not distributed week. Board throughout the week. Participation Student contributions to Participant posts Participant posts insightful discussions are minimal substantial l comments comments and questions and/or may be and questions that prompt that prompt on-topic insubstantial. on-topic discussion. discussion. Careful Contributions do not Reading of assignment is reading of assignment is indicate understanding evident evident. Critical inquiry or completion of the and synthesis is modeled. assigned reading or activities. Participant is non- Participant’s responses Participant helps clarify or responsive, rude or continue the discussion of synthesize other ideas, abusive to other the topic. explains or elaborates on participants. other ideas. Contributions help others understand topic more through varied perspectives and associations. Class Does not contribute to Participates verbally in Participates (as class discussion verbally class more than once, or Acceptable) with high Participation or by chat, or at least once, if possible, quality contributions or contribution(s) lack with additional written questions that promote in- content quality. comments. Contributions depth discussion. reflect thoughtfulness.

ED 675

COURSE CONTENT: ED 675 Reading and Cognition Tentative Schedule

Class Topic Required Readings Assignments Due date 1/11 Overview and review •Irwin #1, #2 Comprehension Process •Recommended: Comprehension Process Tchg R&U #20 Anderson R&U #21 Bransford 1/18 The Reader: Engagement/ •Irwin #7 Affective Elements •Ruddell #27 RAND RdgGrp Scaffolding & Explicit •Smith, “Demonstrations, Instruction: Modeling Engagement, and Sensitivity” (resources) •Keene (#1 optional) p. 14, Figure 1.1 #2, pp 24-44 (•Miller #1, #2 & #3) 1/25 Inferences •Keene #4, #5, #6, (•Miller #5, #8) •Lipson, "The influence of religious affiliation... “ (Resources) •Steffensen et al, “Cross-cultural perspective...” (Resources) 2/1 Elaboration •Irwin #5, #6 First Draft: Description Metacognitive Processes •Keene #3, #7 of the reader for Case Study: Developmental (•Miller #4, #6) level, cultural perspectives Ruddell #28 engagement, schema Blessing’s Bead 2/8 Macroprocesses •Irwin #4 •Ruddell #23, Spiro, et al Blessing’s Bead 2/15 Macroprocesses •Keene #8, #9 First Draft: Elaborations (•Miller #7, #10) part of reading compo nent analysis assgnmnt •Ruddell #25 Cote & Goldman & #30 Meyer: Intro up to Methods; Conclusions/ Discussion 2/22 Inference at the macro level Blessing’s Bead First Draft: Elaborations, Inferences part of case study

3/ 1 Microprocesses •Weaver pp27-32/49-57/61-80 •Weaver #6 p125-138 Skim for strategies •Ruddell #19 Nagy & Scott, #22 Goodman & Goodman 3/8 Vacation Blessing’s Bead 3/15 Microprocesses •Irwin #3 First draft: Macro- processes section of •Caplan, "Style Study: One ...”. (Resources) reading compo •Austin, “Beyond Sentence nent analysis assgnmnt Combining” (Resources) 3/22 Microprocesses •Irwin #10 First draft: Macro- McKeown, “Questioning the Processes section of author” See link on website Case study Dewitz & Dewitz, “They can read the words, but…” See link on website ED 675 3/29 Metacognitive Strategies Irwin #8, #9 Matching text to reader Keene, Appndx A, B Applying theory to practice (•Miller #9)

4/5 Metacognitive Strategies Keene #10, First Draft: Micro and Typical & Atypical Readers (•Miller #11) Metacognitive parts of R&U #24, Spiro reading compo R&U#29 Brown, Palincsar, nent analysis assgnmnt Armbruster 4/12 Peer Review of Case Studies •Irwin #1, #2 again ! Entire Case Study Rough Draft

4/19 Differentiation—what is None • Case Study Due Different? • Reading component Supporting the Striving Reader analysis assignment due

4/26 Bringing It All Together None • Reflective writing self-assessment due

GRADING SCALE: Please refer to the college catalog for information on university grading policies and procedures. Grades will be earned based on the following point scale: 92-100 A 90-91 A- 88-89 B+ 82-88 B 80-81 B- 78-79 C+ below 78 C

ACADEMIC POLICY STATEMENT: Honesty in academic endeavors is a central tenet of the UAS philosophy. One may feel proud of accomplishments and success attained honorably through hard work. Knowledge gained in this way often leads to later success in professional pursuits and in personal life. Unfortunately, academic stress and anxiety sometimes impact the individual in ways that produce dishonest behavior, or taking an “easier” route to fulfilling academic responsibilities. Infractions of academic dishonesty can lead to serious consequences. Refer to the UAS Student Handbook for more details. Programs offered through the Learning Center and the Student Resource Center address topics such as study skills and time management to reduce stress and thus help to prevent dishonest behavior.

STUDENT WITH DISABILITIES: To aid college students who experience a documented physical, cognitive, and/or psychiatric disability. Disability Support Services are available on all UAS campuses. The University of Alaska Southeast is committed to equal opportunity and programmatic access for students with disabilities (See University of ED 675 Alaska Regents Policy: www.alaska.edu/bor/policy/policy.xml). For further information on disability support services and guidelines about documentation please visit our website at www.uas.alaska.edu/dss www.uas.alaska.edu/dss or: In Juneau: (907)796-6000 In Ketchikan: (907) 228-4505 In Sitka: (907) 747-7716 Early contact with this program promotes a positive educational experience

CIVILITY AND HARASSMENT Intellectual honesty, mutual respect, and freedom from discrimination, intimidation, harassment and violence against persons or property are central to the UAS mission. Acts of intolerance and abusive behaviors which violate these basic values will not go unchallenged within our academic community.

UAS is committed to standards promoting speech and expression that fosters the maximum exchange of ideas and opinions. Ideally, discourse is open, candid, and characterized by mutual respect and dignity.

It is the goal of the University to foster a campus climate which promotes the ideals of civility and appreciation for the uniqueness of each member of our academic community.

DISPOSITIONS FOR PROFESSIONAL EDUCATORS

1. Abide by a philosophy of education and remain flexible to revising it based on new research and teaching experience. 2. Appreciate unique thinking processes of learners at different stages of development. 3. Appreciate multiple perspectives and value individual differences. 4. Commit to professional discourse about content knowledge and student learning of content. 5. Value assessment and instruction as integrated processes. 6. Commit to ensuring student well being and development of self-regulation and group interaction skills. 7. Recognize the school as an integral part of the community and value parents as partners in promoting student learning. 8. Value professional ethics, democratic principles, and collaborative learning communities. 9. Value technology as a tool for student and teacher lifelong learning. ED 675

References

Afflerbach, P.P., and Johnston, P.H. (1986) What Do Expert Readers Do When the Main Idea is Not Explicit? In J.F. Buamann, Ed., Teaching Main Idea Comprehension. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Anderson, R.C., and Pearson, P.D. (1984). A Schema-Theoretic View of Basic Processes in Reading. In P.D. Pearson, Ed. Handbook of Reading Research. White Plains, NY: Longman.

Brown, A.L., Day, J.D. and Jones, E.S. (1983) The Development of Plans for Summarizing Texts. Child Development 54:968-979.

Brown, A.L. & Day, J.D. (1983). Macrorules for summarizing texts: The development of expertise. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior, 22; 1-14.

Dole, Janice A. (1991). Moving from the Old to the New: Research on Reading Comprehension Instruction. In Review of Educational Research v61 n2 p239-64

Irwin, Judith Westphal (1991) Teaching Reading Comprehension Processes, 2nd Ed., Prentice Hall.

Keene, Ellin Oliver and Zimmermann, Susan. (1997) Mosaic of Thought: Teaching Comprehension in a Reader's Workshop, Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Kimmel, S. & MacGinitie, W.H. (1984) Identifying children who use a perseverative text processing strategy. Reading Research Quarterly, 19, 2 (162-172)

Kintsch, W. & Greene, E. (1978) The Role of Culture-Specific Schemata in the Comprehension and Recall of Stories. Discourse Processes, 1 (1-13)

Kintch, W., and Van Dijk, T.A. (1978) Toward a Model of Text Comprehension and Production. Psychological Review 363-398.

Leu, Donald J., . Kinzer, Charles K., Eds. (1993) Examining Central Issues in Literacy Research, Theory, and Practice. Forty-Second Yearbook of the National Reading Conference.

Lipson, M.Y. (1983) The Influence of Religious Affiliation on Children's Memory for Text Information. Reading Research Quarterly, 18;4 (448-457).

Meyer, B.J. (1977). The Structure of Prose: Effects on Learning and Memory and Implications for Educational Practice. In. R.C. Anderson, W.E. Montague, & R.J. Spiro, (Eds.) Schooling and the Acquisition of Knowledge. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

Meyer, B.J. & Freedle, R. (1984) Effects of Discourse Type on Recall. American Educational Research Journal, 21 (121-143)

Meyer, B.J. & Rice, G.E. (1984) The Structure of Text. In P.D. Pearson, Ed.) Handbook of Reading Research NY: Longman. 319-352.

Paris, S.G., Cross, D.R. and Lipson, M.Y. (1984) Informed Strategies for Learning: A Program to Improve Children's Reading Awareness and Comprehension. Journal of Educational Psychology 76:1239-1252.

Pearson, P. David (Ed). (1984 ) Handbook of Reading Research, New York: Longman

Pearson, P. David, and Fielding, Linda. (1991.) “Comprehension Instruction” in Handbook of Reading Research, Barr, Kamil, Mosenthal & Pearson (Eds). Longman Publishing,

Pearson, P.D., Roehler, L.R., Dole, J.A., and Duffy, G.G. (1992) Developing Expertise in Reading ED 675 Comprehension. In J. Samuels and A Farstrup, Ed., What Research Has to Say About Reading Instruction. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Pressley, Michael. (1994) Transactional Instruction of Reading Comprehension Strategies. Perspectives in Reading Research, Athens: National Reading Research Center.

Richgels, D., McGee L., Lomas, R., & Sheard, C. (1987) Awareness of Four Text Structures: Effects on Recall of Expository Text. Reading Research Quarterly, 22. (177-197)

Ruddell,, R.B. Ruddell, M.R. & Singer, H. (Eds). Theoretical models and processes of reading (4th ed.) Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Schneider, W., Korkel, J., & Weinert, F.E. (1989) Domain-specific knowledge and memory performance: A comparison of high- and low-aptitude children. Journal of Educational Psychology, 81, 306-312

Scollon, R. & Scollon, B.K. (1981) Narrative, Literacy and Face in Interethnic Communication. NJ: Ablex.

Spiro, R.J., Ruce, B.C. & Brewer, W.F. (Eds.) Theoretical Issues in Reading Comprehension. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.

Steffensen, M.S., Joag-Dev, C. & Anderson, R.C. (1979) A Cross-Cultural Perspective on Reading Comprehension. Reading Research Quarterly 15;1 (10-29).

Tierney, R.J. and Cunningham, J.W. (1984) Research on Teaching Reading Comprehension in P.D.. Pearson, ED. Handbook of Reading Research. White Plains, NY: Longman

Tierney, R.J. & Readence, John E. (2000) Reading Strategies and Practices, 5th Ed. Boston: Allyn & Bacon. van Dijk, R.A. (1980) Macrostructures. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. vanDijk, T.A., and Kintsch, Walter. (1983) Strategies of Discourse Comprehension. New York: Academic Press.

Winograd, P.N. and Bridge, C.A. 1986. The Comprehension of Important Information in Written Prose. In J.F. Baumann, Ed., Teaching Main Idea Comprehension. Newark, DE: International Reading Asspociation ED 675

GRADUATE COMPETENCIES: 1. Communication 1.1 Candidates possess effective professional writing skills appropriate in their fields. 1.2 Candidates are effective in presentations and professional discourse. 1.3 Candidates use substantial comprehension skills in reading and listening. 1.4 Candidates understand the role of technology and effectively use it for professional communication.

2. Professional Behavior 2.1 Candidates recognize ethical and professional responsibilities. 2.2 Candidates can work effectively in various roles with diverse individuals and groups to achieve common goals. 2.3 Candidates can assume a leadership role, when necessary.

3. Critical Thinking and Problem Solving 3.1 Candidates identify, analyze and conceptualize problems in their field. 3.2 Candidates evaluate and synthesize data, considering multiple perspectives. 3.3 Candidates understand the holistic and systemic nature of issues in relation to various environments. 3.4 Candidates understand the role of technology in analysis and decision-making 3.5 Candidates exercise judgment in decision-making. ED 675 International Reading Association 2010 Standards and Suggested Evidence

STANDARD ELEMENTS EVIDENCE FOR READING SPECIALIST/LITERACY COACH CANDIDATES STANDARD 1: FOUNDATIONAL KNOWLEDGE Candidates 1.1 Understand •Interpret major theories of reading and writing understand the major theories and processes and development to understand the theoretical and empirical research needs of all readers in diverse contexts. evidence-based that describe the •Analyze classroom environment quality for foundations of cognitive, linguistic, fostering individual motivation to read and write reading and writing motivational, and (e.g., access to print, choice, challenge, and processes and sociocultural interests). instruction. foundations of •Demonstrate a critical stance toward the reading and writing scholarship of the profession. development, •Read and understand the literature and processes and research about factors that contribute to reading components, success (e.g., social, cognitive, and physical). including word •Inform other educators about major theories of recognition, reading and writing processes, components, language and development with supporting research comprehension, evidence, including information about the strategic knowledge, relationship between the culture and native and reading-writing language of English learners as a support connections. system in their learning to read and write English. 1.2 Understand the •Interpret and summarize historically shared historically shared knowledge (e.g., instructional strategies and knowledge of the theories) that addresses the needs of all profession and readers. changes over time in •Inform educators and others about the the perceptions of historically shared knowledge base in reading reading and writing and writing an d its role in reading education. development, processes, and components. 1.3 Understand the •Model fair-mindedness, empathy, and ethical role of professional behavior when teaching students and working judgment and with other professionals. practical knowledge •Communicate the importance of fair- for improving all mindedness, empathy, and ethical behavior in students’ reading literacy instruction and professional behavior. development and achievement. STANDARD 2: CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION Candidates use 2.1 Use foundational •Demonstrate an understanding of the research instructional knowledge to design and literature that undergirds the reading and approaches, or implement an writing curriculum instruction for all pre-K—12 materials, and an integrated, students. ED 675 integrated, comprehensive, and •Develop and implement the curriculum to meet comprehensive, balanced curriculum. the specific needs of students who struggle with balanced reading. curriculum to •Support teachers and other personnel in the support student design, implementation, and evaluation of the learning in reading reading and writing curriculum for all students. and writing. •Work with teachers and other personnel in developing a literacy curriculum that has vertical and horizontal alignment across pre-K—12. 2.2 Use appropriate •Use instructional approaches supported by and varied literature and research for the following areas: instructional concepts of print, phonemic awareness, approaches, phonics, vocabulary, comprehension, fluency, including those that critical thinking, motivation, and writing. develop word •Provide appropriate in-depth instruction for all recognition, readers and writers, especially those who language struggle with reading and writing. comprehension, •Support classroom teachers and education strategic knowledge, support personnel to implement instructional and reading-writing approaches for all students. connections. •As needed, adapt instructional materials and Reading specialists may have approaches to meet the language-proficiency responsibilities for teaching students who struggle with needs of English learners and students who learning to read and must also struggle to learn to read and write. be able to support teachers in their efforts to provide effective instruction for all students. McKenne and Stahl (2009) define reading as including word recognition, language comprehension, and strategic knowledge…. 2.3 Use a wide range •Demonstrate knowledge of and a critical stance of texts (e.g., toward a wide variety of quality traditional print, narrative, expository, digital, and online resources. and poetry) from •Support classroom teachers in building and traditional print, using a quality, accessible classroom library and digital, and online materials collection that meets the specific resources. needs and abilities of all learners. •Lead collaborative school efforts to evaluate, select, and use a variety of instructional materials to meet the specific needs and abilities of all learners. Reading specialist may provide support through modeling, co-teaching, observing, planning, and providing resources. STANDARD 3: ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION Candidates use a 3.1Understand types •Demonstrate an understanding of the literature variety of of assessments and and research related to assessments and their assessment tools their purposes, uses and misuses. and practices to strengths, and •Demonstrate an understanding of established plan and evaluate limitations. purposes for assessment the performance of all effective reading readers, including tools for screening, diagnosis, and writing progress monitoring, and measuring outcomes. instruction. •Recognize the basic technical adequacy of ED 675 assessments (e.g., reliability, content, and construct validity) •Explain district and state assessment frameworks, proficiency standards, and student benchmarks. 3.2 Select, develop, •Administer and interpret appropriate administer, and assessments for students, especially those who interpret struggle with reading and writing. assessments, both •Collaborate with and provide support to all traditional print and teachers in the analysis of data, using the electronic, for assessment results of all students. specific purposes •Lead schoolwide or larger scale analyses to select assessment tools that provide a systemic framework for assessing the reading, writing, and language growth of all students. 3.3 Uses •Use multiple data sources to analyze individual assessment readers’ performance and to plan instruction information to plan and intervention. and evaluate •Analyze and use assessment data to examine instruction. the effectiveness of specific intervention practices and students’ responses to instruction. •Lead teachers in analyzing and using classroom, individual, grade-level, or schoolwide assessment data to make instructional decisions. •Plan and evaluate professional development initiatives using assessment data. 3.4 Communicate •Analyze and report assessment results to a assessment results variety of appropriate audiences for relevant and implications to a implications, instructional purposes, and variety of audiences. accountability. •Demonstrate the ability to communicate results of assessments to various audiences. STANDARD 4: DIVERSITY Candidates create 4.1 Recognize, •Demonstrate an understanding of the ways in and engage their understand, and which diversity influences the reading and students in literacy value the forms of writing development of students, especially practices that diversity that exist in those who struggle with reading and writing. develop society and their •Assist teachers in developing reading and awareness, importance in writing instruction that is responsive to diversity. understanding, learning to read and •Assist teachers in understanding the respect, and a write. relationship between first- and second-language valuing of acquisition and literacy development. differences in our •Engage the school community in conversations society. about research on diversity and how diversity impacts reading and writing development. 4.2 Use a literacy •Provide differentiated instruction and curriculum and instructional materials, including traditional print, engage in digital, and online resources, that capitalize on instructional diversity. ED 675 practices that •Support classroom teachers in providing positively impact differentiated instruction and developing students’ knowledge, students as agents of their own literacy learning. beliefs, and •Support and lead other educators to recognize engagement with the their own cultures in order to teach in ways that features of diversity. are responsive to students’ diverse backgrounds. •Collaborate with others to build strong home-to- school and school-to-home literacy connections. •Provide support and leadership to educators, parents and guardians, students, and other members of the school community in valuing the contributions of diverse people and traditions to literacy learning. 4.3 Develop and •Provide students with linguistic, academic, and implement strategies cultural experiences that link their communities to advocate for with the school. equity. •Advocate for change in societal practices and institutional structures that are inherently biased or prejudiced against certain groups. •Demonstrate how issues of inequity and opportunities for social justice activism and resiliency can be incorporated into the literacy curriculum. •Collaborate with teachers, parents and guardians, and administrators to implement policies and instructional practices that promote equity and draw connections between home and community literacy and school literacy. STANDARD 5: LITERATE ENVIRONMENT Candidates create 5.1 Design the •Arrange instructional areas to provide easy a literate physical environment access to books and other instructional environment that to optimize students’ materials for a variety of individual, small-group, fosters reading and use of traditional and whole-class activities and support teachers writing by print, digital, and in doing the same. integrating online resources in • Modify the arrangements to accommodate foundational reading and writing students’ changing needs. knowledge, instruction. instructional practices, approaches and methods, curriculum materials, and the appropriate use of assessments. 5.2 Design a social •Create supportive social environments for all environment that is students, especially those who struggle with low risk, includes reading and writing. choice, motivation, • Model for and support teachers and other ED 675 and scaffolded professionals in doing the same for all students. support to optimize •Create supportive environments where English students; learners are encouraged and given many opportunities for opportunities to use English. learning to read and write. 5.3 Use routines to •Understand the role of routines in creating and support reading and maintaining positive learning environments for writing instruction reading and writing instruction using traditional (e.g., time allocation, print, digital, and online resouraces. transitions from one • Create effective routines for all students, activity to another; especially those who struggle with reading and discussions, and writing. peer feedback. • Support teachers in doing the same for all readers. 5.4 Use a variety of •Use evidence-based grouping practices to classroom meet the needs of all students, especially those configurations (i.e., who struggle with reading and writing. whole class, small • Support teachers in doing the same for all group, and students. individual) to differentiate instruction. STANDARD 6: PROFESSIONAL LEARNING AND LEADERSHIP Candidates 6.1 Demonstrate • Use literature and research findings about recognize the foundational adult learning, organizational change, importance of, knowledge of adult professional development, an d school culture in demonstrate, and learning theories and working with teachers and other professionals. facilitate related research • Use knowledge of students and teachers to professional about organizational build effective professional development learning and change, professional programs. leadership as a development, and • Use the research base to assist in building an career-long effort school culture effective, schoolwide professional development and responsibility. program. 6.2 Display positive •Articulate the research base related to the dispositions related connections among teacher dispositions, to their own reading student learning and the involvement of parents, and writing and the guardians, and the community. teaching of reading •Promote the value of reading and writing in and and writing, and out of school by modeling a positive attitude pursue the toward reading and writing with students, development of colleagues, administrators, and parents and individual guardians. professional • Join and participate in professional literacy knowledge and organizations, symposia, conferences, and behaviors. workshops. • Demonstrate effective interpersonal, communication, and leadership skills • Demonstrate effective use of technology for improving student learning. ED 675 6.3 Participate in, • Collaborate in planning, leading and design, facilitate, evaluating professional development activities lead, and evaluate for individuals and groups of teachers. Activities effective and may include working individually with teachers differentiated (e.g., modeling, coplanning, coteaching, and professional observing) or with groups (e.g., teacher development workshops, group meetings, and online programs. learning). • Demonstrate the ability to hold effective conversations (e.g., for planning and reflective problem solving) with individuals and groups of teachers, work collaboratively with teachers and administrators, and facilitate group meetings. • Support teachers in their efforts to use technology in literacy assessment and instruction 6.4 Understand and • Demonstrate an understanding of local, state, influence local, state, and national policies that affect reading and or national policy writing instruction. decisions. • Write or assist in writing proposals that enable schools to obtain additional funding to support literacy efforts. • Promote effective communication and collaboration among stakeholders, including parents and guardians, teachers, administrators, policymakers, and community members. • Advocate with various groups (e.g., administrators, school boards, and local, state, and federal policymaking bodies) for needed organizational and instructional changes to promote effective literacy instruction.