0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

St. Thomas Aquinas College Division of Teacher Education Educators are informed decision-makers who create effective learning environments for all students.

EDSP 412: Teaching Methods: High-Incidence Disabilities

Anne L. Gross, Ph.D. Naughton Hall 2nd floor; 845-398-4156, e-mail: [email protected] Office Hours: Monday & Wednesday 10:30-11:30 AM; Tuesday 10:30 AM – 12:30 PM

COURSE DESCRIPTION Research-based practices for effective instruction to develop student’s cognitive and academic skills. Examination of strategies for assessing students’ academic skills and monitoring progress, remedial strategies for teaching reading, writing, math skills, and learning skills, and procedures for consultation and collaboration with parents and professionals. Prerequisites: EDSP 347 and EDSP 350. Field experiences required.

COURSE OBJECTIVES Knowledge—Candidates will: Assessment, Diagnosis, and Evaluation 1. describe the use of curriculum-based measurement procedures in making instructional decisions and monitoring student progress. Instructional Content and Practice 2. discuss the influence of learning theory on current instructional practices in special education. 3. discuss the influence of the students’ stage of learning and motivational factors on instructional decisions. 4. explain by example how teaching strategies/materials change as students move through the stages of learning. 5. discuss models/approaches (e.g., explicit, multisensory instruction, peer tutoring, cooperative learning, cognitive strategies instruction, remedial instruction) for teaching basic academic skills. 6. discuss considerations (e.g., research on learning; student background) when selecting, adapting, and developing instructional materials for students with special needs. 7. identify ways technology can support students’ learning of academic skills. 8. discuss the importance of metacognitive strategy instruction and describe specific strategies for acquiring, organizing, memorizing, and expressing information. Professionalism and Ethical Practices 9. discuss the professional responsibilities of a special educator delineated in the Code of Ethics developed by the Council for Exceptional Children.

Page 1 of 10 0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

Skills—Candidates will: Assessment, Diagnosis, and Evaluation 1. use a spreadsheet to organize curriculum-based measurement data and to chart student progress. 2. use curriculum-based measurement and other informal procedures (e.g., error analysis, informal reading inventory, miscue analysis) to assess students’ performance, set instructional objectives, design instructional interventions, and monitor progress. Instructional Content and Practice 3. write IEP annual goals and short-term objectives based on current levels of performance. 4. use informal assessment procedures (e.g., error analysis, miscue analysis) to identify learning objectives and effective remedial strategies in reading, writing, and mathematics. 5. use the explicit multisensory instruction model to develop lesson plans/activities and to teach basic reading and writing skills. 6. identify prerequisite and component skills needed by students in order to complete an academic learning task successfully. 7. select/create/modify instructional activities and materials for students with special needs. 8. use explicit instruction teaching strategies used to maintain the pace and students’ active participation during lessons. 9. use effective instructional techniques to develop students’ metacognitive skills. Professionalism and Ethical Practices 10. use professional journals and other library resources to obtain information about research- based instructional approaches/methods/strategies/materials for teaching students with special needs. 10. reflect on lessons taught in the field and identify goals for self-improvement of teaching skills. 11. write a personal philosophy of teaching as a special educator.

COURSE FORMAT Class sessions will include lectures, discussions and group activities. A schedule listing readings and assignments is included in this course outline.

EVALUATION Grades will be assigned following the guidelines in the College Catalog. The amount that each assignment contributes to the final grade is indicated in the course requirements.

REQUIRED READINGS Moats, Louisa C. (2000). Speech to print: Language essentials for teachers. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.

Spear-Swerling, Lousise & Sternberg, Robert J. (2001). What science offers teachers of reading. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(1), 51-57.

Additional readings as assigned by the instructor.

Page 2 of 10 0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

ASSIGNMENTS 1. Class Participation Candidates are expected to complete assigned readings and study assignments before coming to class, attend every class, remain in the classroom during the entire period and participate in class activities. Cell phones, pagers etc. are to be turned off during class

2. Examination (20%) There will be one examination on the structure of the English language.

3. In-Class Application Assignments: Diagnostic Teaching (30%). The purpose of these assignments is a) to increase your understanding of the structure of the English language, b) to develop your skill in using curriculum-based assessment to monitor student progress in reading, and c) to develop your skillful use of explicit, multisensory instructional methods. Candidates will complete directed reading and study assignments and develop instructional activities using an explicit multisensory approach.

4. Field-based Application Assignments: Diagnostic Teaching (20%) The purpose of these assignments is to develop your skill in administering and interpreting curriculum-based assessment procedures. Candidates will administer and score CBM reading measures and prepare written analyses of student performance.

5. Case Study (30%) The purpose of this assignment is a) to increase your understanding of the concepts and skills that you will teach, b) to increase your understanding of the learning characteristics of students with learning difficulties, and c) to develop your skillful use of explicit, multisensory instructional methods. Candidates analyze and apply information from a case study of an academic lesson.

Field experiences: Candidates are expected to complete weekly field experiences in classrooms serving students with mild/moderate disabilities under the supervision of a certified special education teacher. A copy of the field experiences time sheet must be submitted to the professor before week 14 of the semester. Candidates seeking special education certification must complete 150 hours of field experiences prior to student teaching.

Candidates needing accommodations for a documented disability should notify the instructor before the end of the first week of classes.

Written assignments are evaluated on the basis of content and presentation. A handout describing the Teacher Education format and APA style can be obtained in the ERC. Candidates are encouraged to take advantage of the services provided by the Academic Skills Center. Assignments are due at the start of the class sessions and will not be accepted after the due date.

Page 3 of 10 0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

In-Class Application Assignments: Diagnostic Teaching

The purpose of these assignments is a) to increase your understanding of the structure of the English language, b) to develop your skill in using curriculum-based assessment to monitor student progress in reading, and c) to develop your skillful use of explicit, multisensory instructional methods. Candidates will complete directed reading and study assignments and develop instructional activities using an explicit multisensory approach.

Assignment #1: Multisensory Procedures for Introducing a Letter-Sound Relationship Assignment #2: Multisensory Procedures for Introducing a Type of Syllable Assignment #3: Multisensory Procedures for Introducing Irregular Words

The following criteria will be used to evaluate the each in-class application assignment: Content (0-8 points)  Activities contain all required steps and clearly show the use of explicit, multisensory procedures.  Correct use of terminology related to the structure of the English language Organization (0-1 point):  Assignments follow the structure provided by the instructor and are written in complete English sentences Presentation (0-1 point): 1. Professional presentation; well formed sentences, variety in sentence structure and vocabulary, free from grammatical and spelling errors; Written neatly, easy to read. APA format.

Grading: A) Above Standard. (10 points) B) At Standard. (8-9 points) C) Approaching Standard. (7 points) D) Unacceptable. (6 points) F) Unacceptable. (0-5 points)

Field-based Application Assignments: Diagnostic Teaching

The purpose of these assignments is to develop your skill in administering and interpreting curriculum-based assessment procedures. Candidates will administer and score CBM reading measures and prepare written analyses of student performance.

Assignment #1: Using the sentence starters provided by the instructor, obtain 2 unaided writing samples from a student in the upper elementary grades (4th to 6th). Analyze the samples using procedures provided by the instructor. Use CBM mastery standards to develop a short-term objective for the student. Assignment #2: Administer DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency passages to a student in the lower elementary grades (1st to 3rd) twice a week for four consecutive weeks. Chart the student’s performance using both the aimline and quarter-intersect methods. Use CBM mastery standards to develop a short-term objective for the student.

Page 4 of 10 0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

Evaluation and Grading of Field-Based Application Assignments: Rating 1 2 3 Indicator Indicator Not Met Indicator Partially Met Indicator Met Score Assignment #1 Use of CBM: Data (writing samples) not Data (writing samples) Data (writing samples) Error collected correctly. collected correctly. Error collected correctly. Error Analysis analysis is mostly accurate. analysis is complete and accurate. Use of CBM: Instructional goal is not Instructional goal is Instructional goal is based Learning appropriate or not appropriate and contains on CBM mastery standards Objective included. the required components. and contains the required components. Assignment #2 Use of CBM: Assessment measures Assessment data is Assessment data is Data selected are not gathered once a week over gathered twice a week for Collection appropriate. a minimum of four weeks a minimum of four Standardized directions are using progress-monitoring consecutive weeks using not followed correctly. assessments. Standardized measures are appropriate Student responses are not directions are followed and to the student’s grade and recorded correctly. most student responses are instructional level. recorded correctly. Standardized directions are followed and student responses are recorded correctly. Use of CBM: Scoring protocols are not Scoring protocols are Scoring protocols are Data Analysis included or incomplete. completed with some completed accurately. Calculation of scores is errors. Calculation of Calculation of scores is inaccurate and no evidence scores is mostly accurate. accurate and evidence of of steps taken to ensure the CBM chart is mostly steps taken to ensure the accuracy of scores is correct. Decision rule is accuracy of the scores is lacking. Insufficient data applied correctly. provided. CBM chart is collected. CBM chart is correct and is created using incorrect or not included. a spreadsheet program. Decision rule is not Decision rule is applied identified. correctly. Use of CBM: Instructional goal is not Instructional goal is Instructional goal is based Learning appropriate or not appropriate and contains on CBM mastery standards Objective included. the required components. and contains the required components. Presentation of the Paper Presentation Organization is limited; Professional organization Professional organization of the Papers presentation includes many and presentation; few and presentation; no spelling, grammatical, or spelling, grammatical, or spelling, grammatical, or mechanical errors; does mechanical errors; APA mechanical errors; APA not follow APA format. format. All required format. All required Required materials are not materials are included. materials are included. included.

Page 5 of 10 0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

Case Study Assignment

The purpose of this assignment is a) to increase your understanding of the concepts and skills that you will teach, b) to increase your understanding of the learning characteristics of students with learning difficulties, and c) to develop your skillful use of explicit, multisensory instructional methods. Candidates analyze and apply information from a case study of an academic lesson.

The case study is based on a series of lesson observations in inclusive classrooms by teacher education candidates. The case study begins with the Lesson Objective as identified in the classroom teacher’s plan book. The Background Information provides a brief description of the classroom and students. A Lesson Script details the actions taken by the teacher and the students’ responses during a segment of the lesson. The Lesson Script is followed by Selected Work Samples which show work by capable students and by students with learning difficulties. The errors made by students should give you insight into their understanding of the concepts/skills presented during the lesson (i.e., know who you are stuffing!). Next is a Reading Assignment (i.e., know your stuff!) that should assist you in understanding the content to be taught and in identifying ways to improve the academic achievement of students with learning difficulties. Next is a Lesson Analysis, your critical analysis of the effectiveness of the case lesson for students with learning difficulties and your recommendations for a more effective lesson (i.e., ways to improve the achievement of students with learning difficulties). The final section is an Application which allows you to explain how you would use explicit, multisensory instruction to teach a component of the lesson Components of the Case Study Assignment 1. Lesson Based on the reading assignment for the case study, write an essay in which you: Analysis a) describe in detail the content (i.e., concepts and skills) that will be taught including prerequisite concepts/skills and concepts/skills students will learn next, and b) the strategies students will use during instruction (i.e., what students will do with that content).

2. Based on the lesson analysis and the error analysis of the student work samples, Application write an essay in which you a) identify specific learning objectives for the student and explain the basis for selection of those objectives; b) Explain how the design of instructional materials* supports the student’s attainment of the learning objectives; c) explain relationships between content/skills to be learned and the processes that students engage in during instructional activities that will lead to students’ attainment of learning objectives (i.e., explicit, multisensory learning activities). *append instructional materials to this essay.

3. Reflection Write an essay in which you analyze what you have learned about teaching and learning from this case study assignment. How does knowing the content and the students and using explicit, multisensory instruction influence your students’ achievement of the learning objectives?

Written Use APA format. Use titles (Lesson Analysis, Application, Reflection). Papers Instructional materials must be included in the Application section of the paper. Reproducible worksheets or copies of workbook pages are not considered instructional materials and should not be included in the paper.

Page 6 of 10 0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

Evaluation & Grading: Case Study Assignment

Rating 1 2 3 Indicator Indicator Not Met Indicator Partially Met Indicator Met Score Lesson Analysis Understands Content is presented as Content is presented as sets of Content is organized around the Content discrete facts/skills. related facts and skills. “big ideas” and outlined in detail. Identifies prerequisite concepts/skills. Identifies concepts/skills students will need to learn next. Understands Summary of assigned articles Summary of assigned articles Summary of assigned articles Instructional in response to some of the in response to all of the in response to all of the Strategies guided reading questions. guided reading questions. guided reading questions and presented in candidate’s own words with original examples to illustrate key ideas. Application Use of CBM Describes student’s errors. Describes the student’s errors Explains reasons for student’s Procedures: and general characteristics of errors based on the interaction Error Analysis students and/or the content of variables including that may influence learning. characteristics of the content/skills to be learned, presentation of instruction, instructional materials, and specific characteristics of the student. Writing Learning objectives are not Learning objectives contain Objectives are based on CBM Learning consistent with the content required components and are mastery standards and are Objective(s) and/or the developmental consistent with the content consistent with the content level of the student. and the developmental level and the developmental level of the student. of the student. Planning Describes activities and/or Focuses on actions taken by Focuses on actions taken by Explicit, materials used during the teacher and describes students during instruction Multisensory instruction. modifications/adaptations of and explains how instruction Instruction materials and/or teaching affects student’s attention and methods. recall of the concepts and skills identified in the learning objectives Reflection Self-Evaluation Describes actions of the Describes general ways the Explains in detail how the teacher and the students. teacher’s knowledge and teacher’s knowledge and skills influenced student skills influenced student achievement. achievement. Implications A goal for professional A general plan to improve A specific goal related to the for Professional growth is not given or is not teaching practice is given. self-evaluation is given. A Growth related to the self-evaluation. plan describes specific steps the candidate will take to achieve the goal. Presentation of the Paper Presentation of Organization is limited; Professional organization and Professional organization and the Papers presentation includes many presentation; few spelling, presentation; no spelling, spelling, grammatical, or grammatical, or mechanical grammatical, or mechanical mechanical errors; does not errors; APA format. errors; APA format. follow APA format.

Page 7 of 10 0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

Grading Case Study Assignment: A) Above standard. 22-24 points (90-100%) B) At standard. 20-21 points (80-89%) C) Approaching standard. 17-19 points (70-79%) D) Unacceptable. 15-16 points (60-69%) F) Unacceptable. 0-14 points (0-59%)

Bibliography

Abbott, Mary, Walton, Cheryl, & Greenwood, Charles R. (2002). Research to practice: Phonemic awareness in kindergarten and first grade. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(4) 20-26. August, Diane, Carlo, Maria, Dressler, C., & Snow, Catherine. (2005). The critical role of vocabulary development for English language learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, (20)1, 50-57. Baker, Scott, Gersten, Russell, & Scanlon, David. (2002). Procedural facilitators and cognitive strategies: Tools for unraveling the mysteries of comprehension and the writing process, and for providing meaningful access to the general curriculum. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(1), 65-77. Baxter, Juliet A., Woodward, J., & Olson, D. (2005). Writing in mathematics: An alternative form of communication for academically low-achieving students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(2), 119-135. Birsh, Judith R. (Ed.) (2005). Multisensory teaching of basic language skills (second edition). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. Carroll, Dianne. (2001). Considering paraeducator training, roles, and responsibilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(2), 60-64. Cawley, J., Foley, T. (2002). Connecting math and science for all students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(4), 14-19. Ellis, Edwin, Farmer, T., & Newman, J. (2005). Big ideas about teaching big ideas. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(1), 34-40. Englert, Carol S., Wu, X., & Zhao, Y. (2005). Cognitive tools for writing: Scaffolding the performance of students through technology. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(3), 184-198. Foorman, Barbara R., & Torgesen, Joseph. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small- group instruction promote reading success in all children. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(4), 203-212. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., & Burish, P. (2000). Peer-assisted learning strategies: An evidence-based practice to promote reading achievement. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(2), 85-91. Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L., Thompson, A., Al Otaiba, S., Yen, L., Yang, N. Braun, M., & O’Connor, R. (2002). Exploring the importance of reading programs for kindergartners with disabilities in mainstream classrooms. Exceptional Children, 68(3), 295-310 Fuchs, L., Fuchs, D., Hamlett, C., & Appleton A. (2002). Explicitly teaching for transfer: Effects on the mathematical problem-solving performance of students with mathematics disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(2), 90-106.

Page 8 of 10 0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

Fuchs, Lynn S., & Fuchs Douglas. (2001). Principles for the prevention and intervention of mathematics difficulties. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2), 85-95. Gerber, Michael M., Jimenez, T., Leafstedt, J., et al. (2004). English reading effects of small- group intensive intervention in Spanish for K-1 English learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 19(4), 239-251. Gonzalez, J., Gonzalez, C., Monzo, A., Hernandez-Valle, I. (2000). Onset-rime units in visual word recognition in Spanish normal readers and children with reading disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(3), 135-141. Graham, Steve, Harris, Karen R., & Larsen, L. (2001). Prevention and intervention of writing difficulties for students with learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(2), 74-84. Graves, Anne, Valles, E., & Rueda, R. (2000). Variations in interactive writing instruction: A study in four bilingual special education settings. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 5(1), 1-9. Gunter, P., Miller, K., Venn, M., Thomas, K., & House, S. (2002). Self-graphing to success: Computerized data management. Teaching Exceptional Children, 35(2), 30-34. Haurewas, Laura B. (2003). Spelling of inflected verb morphology in children with spelling deficits. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 18(1), 25-35. Hughes, C., Ruhl, K., Schumaker, J., & Deshler, D. (2002). Effects of instruction in an assignment completion strategy on the homework performance of students with learning disabilities in general education classes. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(1), 1-18. Jenkins, J., Vadasy, P., Firebaugh, M., & Profilet, C. (2000). Tutoring first-grade struggling readers in phonological reading skills. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(2), 75- 84. Jitendra, A. (2002). Teaching students math problem-solving through graphic representations. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(4), 34-38. Jitendra, A., Edwards, L., Choutka, Cl. & Treadway, P. (2002). A collaborative approach to planning in the content areas for students with learning disabilities: Accessing the general curriculum. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(4), 252-267. Leafstedt, Jill M., Richards, Catherine R., & Gerber, Michael M. (2004). Effectiveness of explicit phonological-awareness instruction for at-risk English learners. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 19(4), 252-261. Lian-Thompson, Sylvia & Hickman-Davis, Peggy. (2002). Supplemental reading instruction for students at risk for reading disabilities: Improve reading 30 minutes at a time. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(4), 242-251. Mercer, C., Campbell, K., Miller, M., Mercer, K., & Lane, H. (2000). Effects of a reading fluency intervention for middle schoolers with specific learning disabilities. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(4), 179-189. Montague, M., Warger, C., & Morgan, T. (2000). Solve it! Strategy instruction to improve mathematical problem solving. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(2), 110-116. Morocco, Catherine C., & Hindin, A. (2002). The role of conversation in a thematic understanding of literature. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(3), 144-159.

Page 9 of 10 0fffe08b0517b3a9debc5ce1a8974d50.doc

Rankin-Erickson, Joan L., & Pressley, Michael. (2000). A survey of instructional practices of special education teachers nominated as effective teachers of literacy. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(4), 206-225. Salend, Spencer J., & Duhaney, Laurel M. (2002). Grading students in inclusive settings. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(3), 8-15. Scanlon, David. (2002). PROVE-ing what you know: Using a learning strategy in an inclusive class. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(4), 48-54. Shaywitz, Sally E., & Shaywitz, B. (2004). Reading disability and the brain. Educational Leadership, 61(6), 6-11. Stafford, K. Brooke, Williams, J., Nubla-Kung, A., & Pollini, S. (2005). Teaching at-risk second graders text structure via social studies content. Teaching Exceptional Children, 38(2), 62- 65. Stecker, P., & Fuchs, L. (2000). Effecting superior achievement using curriculum-based measurement: The importance of individual progress monitoring. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(3), 128-134. Torgesen, Joseph K. (2000). Individual differences in response to early interventions in reading: The lingering problem of treatment resisters. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(1), 55-64. Vadasy, Patricia, Sanders, E., Peyton, J. & Jenkins, J. (2002). Timing and intensity of tutoring: A closer look at the conditions for effective early literacy tutoring. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 17(4), 227-241. Vaughn, Sharon, Mathes, Patricia G., Lian-Thompson, S., & Francis David J. (2005). Teaching English language learners at risk for reading disabilities to read: Putting research into practice. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20(1), 58-67. Wanzek, J., Dickson, S., Bursuck, W., & White, J. (2000). Teaching phonological awareness to students at risk for reading failure: An analysis of four instructional programs. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 15(4), 226-239. Washington, Julie A. (2001). Early literacy skills in African-American children: Research considerations. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 16(4), 213-221. Whittaker, Catharine R., Salend, Spencer J., & Duhaney, D. (2001). Creating instructional rubrics for inclusive classrooms. Teaching Exceptional Children, 34(2), 8-13. Woodward, J., Baxter, J., & Robinson, R. (1999). Rules and reasons: Decimal instruction for academically low achieving students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 14(1), 15- 24.

Page 10 of 10