The Citadel, M.Ed., Literacy Education

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

PROGRAM MODIFICATION PROPOSAL FORM

Name of Institution: The Citadel

Briefly state the nature of the proposed modification (e.g., adding a new concentration, extending the program to a new site, curriculum change, etc.):

This proposal is for a curriculum change. Details are as follows:

We propose eliminating the following courses from the program of study for the MEd in Literacy Education: ● EDUC 536: Educational Psychology ● EDUC 589: Methods and Materials in Literacy Education ● EDUC 590: Literacy Assessment and Instruction

In addition, we propose adding these three courses: ● EDUC 668: Principles and Strategies for Teaching ESOL to PK-12 Learners ● EDUC 667: Linguistics for Educators ● EDUC 665: Cultural and Linguistic Diversity in Education

We also propose modifications to the following existing core courses, so that they emphasize the literacy development of English language learners: ● EDUC 570 Teaching Reading and Writing with ELLs and Students from Historically Marginalized Communities ● EDUC 592 Teaching Language and Literacy across the Curriculum

Finally, we propose adding online and hybrid delivery options to all of the courses in the MEd in Literacy Education.

(See curriculum chart on the bottom of page three for more details. See Appendix A for the program’s entire program of study.)

*The nature of these three new courses, and modifications to two existing core courses, permits students to apply for an add-on ESOL endorsement and/or certification from the state of South Carolina (if they choose to do so). This is not a requirement or expected for students in this MEd in Literacy Education program. Further, this program is not intended for preservice teachers working toward initial certification.

Current Name of Program (include degree designation and all concentrations, options, and tracks): MEd in Literacy Education

Proposed Name of Program (include degree designation and all concentrations, options, and tracks): No change.

Program Designation:

☐ Associate’s Degree x Master’s Degree

☐ Bachelor’s Degree: 4 Year ☐ Specialist ☐ Bachelor’s Degree: 5 Year ☐ Doctoral Degree: Research/Scholarship (e.g., Ph.D. and DMA) ☐ Doctoral Degree: Professional Practice (e.g., Ed.D., D.N.P., J.D., Pharm.D., and M.D.) 1

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

Our proposed changes are nested within the MEd in Literacy Education program, so the modifications we are making do not lead to a degree in and of themselves. Instead, as we point out above, we are making changes to the existing program so that coursework within the MEd in Literacy Education will allow students to apply for an endorsement or certification in ESOL from the state of South Carolina.

Does the program currently qualify for supplemental Palmetto Fellows and LIFE Scholarship awards?

☐ Yes ☒ No

If No, should the program be considered for supplemental Palmetto Fellows and LIFE Scholarship awards?

☐ Yes ☒ No

Proposed Date of Implementation: August 2021

CIP Code: 131315

Current delivery site(s) and modes: On-campus

Proposed delivery site(s) and modes: On-campus, blended/hybrid, and online

Program Contact Information (name, title, telephone number, and email address):

Dr. Britnie Delinger Kane, Assistant Professor of Literacy Education and Program Coordinator of Literacy Education, Zucker Family School of Education, (615) 497-1157, [email protected]

Dr. Evan Ortlieb, Dean and Professor, Zucker Family School of Education, (843) 953-5871, [email protected]

Institutional Approvals and Dates of Approval: ● Zucker Family School of Education: October 15, 2020 ● Graduate Curriculum Committee: December, 1 2020 ● Faculty Senate: December 11, 2020

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

Background Information

Provide a detailed description of the proposed modification, including target audience, centrality to institutional mission, and relation to strategic plan.

We propose adding 9 credit hours (3 courses) to our course offerings in the Zucker Family School of Education so that we can offer coursework through which teacher can apply for either an ESOL endorsement or an ESOL certification through the South Carolina Department of Education. Below, we include required coursework for the ESOL certification, as outlined by the SCDE in Guidelines and Requirements for Adding Certification Fields and Endorsements (2019, p. 13):

Three (3) required courses (3 hours each): ● Principles and Strategies for Teaching ESOL to PK–12 Learners ● Linguistics ● Teaching Reading and Writing to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Learners Two (2) of the following elective courses (3 hours each): ● Testing/Assessment for Language Minority Learners ● ESOL Curriculum Design and Materials Development ● Teaching English through the Content Areas ● Bilingual Special Education ● Second Language Acquisition for Teachers of PK – 12 Learners ● English Grammar/Structure ● Cultural Diversity in Education ● Practicum in the Instruction of ESOL to Elementary and Secondary Learners -The practicum may be waived based on documentation of one year of successful experience teaching ESOL.

The table below shows SCDE’s required coursework for the ESOL state certification, as well as The Citadel’s equivalent courses. Courses marked with an asterisk are for an endorsement in ESOL:

Coursework Required by the South Carolina Department of Education and Citadel Equivalencies SCDE Required Course The Citadel’s Equivalent Core Course: Principles and Strategies for EDUC 668—Principles and Strategies for Teaching ESOL to PK–12 Learners* Teaching ESOL to PK-12 Learners* This is a foundational course in the ways that teachers, K-12 and across content areas, can support the learning of students whose first language is not English. The course highlights developmental trajectories related to second language acquisition, compares and contrasts them to first language acquisition, and supports educators in using theory and research to design effective learning environments. This course will have an embedded 15-hour practicum with ELLs to fulfill the requirements of the ESOL endorsement. Core Course: Linguistics EDUC 667: Linguistics for Educators This course introduces the areas of linguistics, such as phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and other related areas that are most applicable to teach English Language Learners (ELLs). Students will understand the English language features and how those features impact ELLs in the

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

classroom. Students will learn instructional strategies related to each linguistic component, gather linguistic data of ELLs using various language and literacy assessment tools, and use those data to develop language and literacy activities. Core Course: Teaching Reading and Writing to EDUC 570: Teaching Reading and Writing with Limited English Proficient (LEP) Learners ELLs and Students from Historically Marginalized Communities This course will introduce students to historical relationships between literacy, culture, socioeconomic status, and power. Through that lens, students will learn about and enact culturally responsive and sustaining pedagogies in reading and writing, focusing on how to support students whose first language is not English, as well as speakers of a range of dialects. Elective: Cultural Diversity in Education* EDUC 665—Cultural and Linguistic Diversity in Education* This course will address major theories and instructional strategies related to equity in education, including foundational ideas related to opportunity gaps in education, the myth of the meritocracy, the dangers of colorblindness, and the influence of stereotype threat and deficit thinking on learning. The course will trace policy and practice related to desegregation and English-only policies in schools. It will also introduce students to culturally responsive and culturally sustaining pedagogies. Elective: Teaching English in the Content Areas EDUC 592: Teaching Language and Literacy across the Content Areas This course will address major theories and instructional strategies related to supporting the development of academic language across content areas, focusing specifically on how teachers of all disciplinary backgrounds can support all students—including English Language Learners, students from historically marginalized communities, and readers at a range of proficiency levels—to develop sophisticated forms of language use in particular content areas. Course topics include content-specific instructional strategies for supporting English Language Learners and students from marginalized communities to speak, read, write, listen, and think in ways consummate with the expectations of a discipline, and using inquiry, collaboration, composition, content-area reading strategies as supports for all students’ learning across the content-areas.

The primary target audience for this coursework is teachers who are already initially certified, but who would like a deeper understanding of research-based practices related to supporting ESOL students’

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

language and literacy development. That said, we hope to attract future principals, assistant principals, and literacy coaches to this coursework as well, as those in the Ed Leadership program at The Citadel will be welcome to take these courses.

Assessment of Need

Provide an assessment of the need for the program modification for the institution, the state, the region, and beyond, if applicable.

Adding an ESOL endorsement and certification to our coursework is essential because, across the US, ELLs are on the rise in urban, suburban, and rural areas. By 2030, 40% of US public school students will be considered English learners (Heineke et al., 2018, p. 33). South Carolina, specifically, is seeing “astonishing” growth in its ELL population: Between 1990 and 2010, South Carolina saw a 200% growth in the number of ELL in its public schools (Lucas & Villegas, 2013).

Despite the changing demographics in South Carolina and beyond, ELLs are not currently well-served by US schools: Only 67% of ELLs graduate from high school in four years—well below the national average of 84% (USDOE, 2018a). Also, the number of South Carolina ELLs in the fourth grade who read proficiently actually decreased between 2009 and 2017 (from 19.9% proficient to 14.6%; USDOE, 2018b).

Yet, because ELLs are—by definition—engaged in learning to be literate in more than one language, they have great potential as learners of language and literacy (Gee, 2008). To reach their potential, they need teachers with specific expertise in literacy instruction for ELLs, and administrators who understand what it takes to teach ELLs (Heineke et al., 2018). However, teachers are inadequately prepared to support ELLs, as teacher preparation programs rarely offer courses specific to the needs of ELLs, and report receiving, on average, just over 4 hours of professional development related to supporting ELLs over five years (Zehler et al., 2003).

In addition, the current shortage of school teachers, specialists, and administrators in various high needs areas is even more alarming in ESOL. In the United States, 64% of all teachers have at least one ELL in class, but only 10% of those teachers have a major, minor, or certification in ESOL (NCES, 2019). ESOL teachers have been on the “Teacher Shortage Area List” in South Carolina from 2014-2019, and data continues to suggest a need for more certified teachers in ESOL (U. S. Department of Education, 2020): Over the last two decades, the ESOL student population in South Carolina has risen from approximately 5000 to over 45000 students, outpacing most of the country in terms of the percentage growth of ELLs (NCES, 2019). In short, the greatest rationale for this program is that the demographics in South Carolina are changing, and the state needs programming designed to support educational systems to meet the needs created by these changes. Thus, although our program will not necessarily provide opportunities for educators to qualify for new jobs, it will support educators to do the jobs they already have with much greater expertise in an area of specific need in South Carolina: ESOL.

Transfer and Articulation Identify any special articulation agreements for the modified proposed program. Provide the articulation agreement or Memorandum of Agreement/Understanding.

None.

Description of the Program

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

Projected Enrollment Fall Spring Summer Year Headcount Headcount Headcount 2021-2022 15 15 15 2022-2023 15 15 22 2023-2024 22 22 22 2024-2025 22 30 30 2025-2026 30 30 30

Explain how the enrollment projections were calculated.

The table above provides a conservative estimate of enrollment given the broad array of teachers, specialists, coaches, and administrators that this add-on endorsement services. This degree program will provide for the professional development that has been lacking in teacher education programs for decades, enabling both new and experienced school personnel access to valuable and relevant professional development.

Besides the general institutional admission requirements, are there any separate or additional admission requirements for the proposed program? If yes, explain.

☐Yes ☒No

Curriculum

Attach a curriculum sheet identifying the courses required for the program.

Please see Appendix A.

Curriculum Changes Courses Eliminated from Courses Added to Program Core Courses Modified Program EDUC 536 Educational EDUC 668 Principles and Strategies EDUC 570 Teaching Reading and Psychology for Teaching ESOL to PK-12 Writing with ELLs and Students Learners from Historically Marginalized Communities EDUC 589 Methods and EDUC 667 Linguistics for Educators EDUC 592 Teaching Language and Materials in Literacy Instruction Literacy across the Curriculum EDUC 665 Cultural and Linguistic EDUC 590 Literacy Assessment Diversity in Education

New Courses List and provide course descriptions for new courses.

*EDUC 668—Principles and Strategies for Teaching ESOL to PK-12 Learners This is a foundational course in the ways that teachers, K-12 and across content areas, can support the learning of students whose first language is not English. The course highlights

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

developmental trajectories related to second language acquisition, compares and contrasts them to first language acquisition, and supports educators in using theory and research to design effective learning environments.

EDUC 667: Linguistics for Educators This course introduces the areas of linguistics, such as phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and other related areas that are most applicable to teach English Language Learners (ELLs). Students will understand the English language features and how those features impact ELLs in the classroom. Students will learn instructional strategies related to each linguistic component, gather linguistic data of ELLs using various language and literacy assessment tools, and use those data to develop language and literacy activities.

*EDUC 665—Cultural and Linguistic Diversity in Education This course will address major theories and instructional strategies related to equity in education, including foundational ideas related to opportunity gaps in education, the myth of the meritocracy, the dangers of colorblindness, and the influence of stereotype threat and deficit thinking on learning. The course will trace policy and practice related to desegregation and English-only policies in schools. It will also introduce students to culturally responsive and culturally sustaining pedagogies.

* Required for ESOL add-on endorsement; all courses needed for certification

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff Similar Programs in South Carolina offered by Public and Independent Institutions Identify the similar programs offered and describe the similarities and differences for each program.

Here are other institutions’ offerings for the MEd in Literacy program:

College/University Comparable Program Similarities Differences Clemson University MEd in Literacy • Clemson has folded • Clemson’s coursework is some ESOL classes offered entirely online; into their literacy ours will be a mix of program coursework. online, face-to-face, and • Clemson’s program hybrid options, includes R2S depending on cohort coursework. needs. • Clemson’s program is 36 credit hours; ours is 30 credit hours. • The focus of one of The Citadel’s ESOL electives is different than Clemson’s electives. While both offer coursework in cultural and linguistic diversity in education, Clemson includes an elective practicum on teaching ESOL in elementary and secondary schools, while The Citadel’s second elective is focused on teaching English in the content areas. • Students at Clemson can choose between two tracks in their Literacy degree: ESOL or Coaching; all Citadel MEd students take 8

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff ESOL coursework as a required part of the degree Winthrop University MEd in Literacy • Winthrop’s program is • Winthrop’s program is offered in a mix of not currently accepting online, face-to-face, new applicants. and hybrid options. • Winthrop’s program is 36 • Winthrop’s program credit hours; ours is 30 includes R2S credit hours. coursework. • Winthrop’s program does not include ESOL endorsement/certification coursework.

Furman University MEd in Literacy • Furman’s program • Furman’s program is 36 includes R2S credit hours; ours is 30 coursework. credit hours. • Furman’s program includes only two electives in ESOL coursework; ours includes 5, and all are required aspects of the program.

USC--Beaufort MEd in Literacy • USC Beaufort’s • This program is 36 credit program is offered in a hours; ours is 30 credit mix of online, face-to- hours. face, and hybrid • USC Beaufort’s program options. of study does not include • USC Beaufort’s an endorsement or program includes R2S certification option in coursework. ESOL. • This program is brand new; ours has been in existence for approximately 25 years.

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

The Citadel is aware that other institutions in the state offer certifications in teaching English for Speakers of Other Languages (ESOL). Still, we believe there is a need for a program housed at The Citadel because of unprecedented growth in the ELL population in South Carolina over the past 20 years, and because of the difficulty educational leaders in and around the Lowcountry highlight in finding teachers and other educational personnel qualified to teach ESOL. As we have noted, ESOL has been on the Teaching Shortage Area List, published by the US Department of Education, in South Carolina from 2014-2019.

We also think our program is necessary because of its focus not only on teachers, but also on instructional coaches and administrators. In order for school improvement to take root, particularly for students from historically marginalized communities, research highlights the need for changes not only in individual teachers’ instruction, but also at the level of district- and school policy (Bryk et al., 2010; Cobb et al., 2018; Kane & Rosenquist, 2019). Thus, better preparing teachers, instructional coaches, and administrators to support ELLs will ultimately result in stronger schools overall, and for ELLs in particular.

In addition to a need for teachers, coaches, and administrators with expertise in supporting ELLs and ESOL programming, we also note that The Citadel’s proposed program itself differs from other South Carolina programs in important ways. First, The Citadel plans to offer coursework in a variety of formats, meaning that some courses may be offered fully face-to-face, some will be offered fully online, and some will be offered in a blended format, depending on enrollment, as well as graduate students’ desire and need. Secondly, some coursework in the ESOL endorsement and certification sequence will have a dual focus on both language and literacy development, since these are--ultimately--tightly interconnected and mutually supportive processes (e.g., Gee, 2008). Finally, the electives (2 of the 5 endorsement courses, or 40%) we plan to offer differ from those offered by the institutions listed above. Specifically, The Citadel plans to offer coursework in Teaching Language and Literacy across the Content-areas, as well as coursework focused on Cultural and Linguistic Diversity in Education. No other program offers elective coursework focused on supporting both multi-language development and literacy across the content areas.

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

Faculty

State whether new faculty, staff or administrative personnel are needed to implement the program modification; if so, discuss the plan and timeline for hiring the personnel. Provide a brief explanation of any personnel reassignment as a result of the proposed program modification.

Rank and Full- Courses Taught for Academic Degrees Other Qualifications and Relevant or Part-time the Program and Coursework Professional Experience Relevant to Courses (e.g., licensures, certifications, years Taught, Including in industry, etc.) Institution and Major

Dean and EDUC 570 PhD. in Curriculum & Extensively published in the area of Professor of Teaching Reading and Instruction (Reading strengths-based literacy Literacy Writing with ELLs and Emphasis), Louisiana instruction/intervention for native and Education (Full) Students from State University non-native English speakers Historically Marginalized M.Ed. in Elementary Communities Education Louisiana State University

B.S. in Elementary Education Louisiana State University Assistant Overall Program Ph. D. in Language, Research foci in literacy, instructional Professor of Coordination Literacy, and Culture, coaching, and educational equity, Literacy Peabody College at diversity and culturally responsive Education and EDUC 592 Vanderbilt University teaching MEd in Literacy Teaching Language Education and Literacy across M. Ed. in Secondary Program the Content Areas English Education, Coordinator (Full) Peabody College at EDUC 665 Vanderbilt University Cultural and Linguistic Diversity in Education B. A. in English, Major: English; Minor: German EDUC 570 University of South Teaching Reading and Carolina Honors College Writing with ELLs and Students from Historically Marginalized Communities Visiting Assistant EDUC 668 Ph.D. in Literacy Specializations in literacy and Professor of Principles and Education at the TESOL Teacher and Strategies for University of Maine Literacy Teaching ESOL to Education (Full) PK-12 Learners M.Ed. in Teaching English to Speakers of EDUC 667 Other Language at the Linguistics for State University of New Educators York at Buffalo

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff EDUC 570: Teaching M.Ed. in English Reading and Writing Education, Graduate with ELLs and School of Education at Students from Korea University in Historically Seoul, South Korea Marginalized Communities B.A. in English Education at Chung-Ang University in Seoul, South Korea *New Professor (open FTE)

No new monies are needed for this curriculum change.

Faculty, Staff, and Administrative Personnel

Discuss the Faculty, Staff, and Administrative Personnel needs of the program.

This program will make use of existing personnel, so there will be no new costs associated with it. For details of existing costs, see chart on p. 14.

Since The Citadel utilizes the same compensation structure without regard to delivery mode, face-to-face, hybrid/blended, and online delivery is expected to be approximately the same cost. The deployment of online and ground-based cohorts will utilize the same faculty members to minimize the number of course preps and to leverage video-taping lecture segments as supplemental resources in online courses, maximizing efficiencies.

Resources

Library and Learning Resources Explain how current library/learning collections, databases, resources, and services specific to the discipline, including those provided by PASCAL, can support the proposed program. Identify additional library resources needed.

TESOL Quarterly TESOL Journal Language Teaching Research Applied Linguistics Language Learning Studies in Second Language Acquisition Second Language Research

The journals listed above are all available through the Daniel Library's research databases except Studies in Second Language Acquisition. Students and instructors can borrow specific articles of Studies in Second Language Acquisition through Interlibrary Loan.

Impact on Existing Programs Will the proposed program impact existing degree programs or services at the institution (e.g., course offerings or enrollment)? If yes, explain. x Yes

☐No 12

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff Yes, the proposed program directly influences the MEd in Literacy Education. Building the ESOL program into the MEd in Literacy Education enriches the MEd in Literacy Education through a greater focus on educational equity and ELLs, while simultaneously increasing the number of ESOL certified teachers, coaches, and administrators in the Lowcountry. For example, as part of our ESOL endorsement and certification program, we will continue to offer coursework in research-based approaches to supporting K-12 students’ literacy development across the content areas, but we will add a specific focus on the content-area instructional needs of those who speak more than one language, as well as speakers of dialects, which is a feature of many public-school students in the Lowcountry. This can be done because language and literacy are mutually supportive, and therefore content-area teachers will learn ways to support both.

Financial Support

No new costs.

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

Sources of Financing for the Program by Year 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Grand Total Category New Total New Total New Total New Total New Total New Total Tuition Funding 162000 133200 237600 295200 324000 1152000 Program-Specific Fees Special State Appropriation Reallocation of Existing Funds Federal, Grant, or Other Funding Total 162000 133200 237600 295200 324000 1152000 Estimated Costs Associated with Implementing the Program by Year 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Grand Total Category New Total New Total New Total New Total New Total New Total Program Administration 21420 21420 21420 21420 21420 107100 and Faculty/Staff Salaries Facilities, Equipment, Supplies, and Materials Library Resources Other (specify) Total 21420 21420 21420 21420 21420 107100 Net Total (Sources of Financing Minus Estimated Costs) 140580 111780 216180 273780 302580 1044900 Budget Justification

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

Provide a brief explanation for all new costs and sources of financing identified in the Financial Support table.

Because this program relies upon existing personnel and resources, there will be no new costs associated with it the program modifications we propose.

Since this is an existing program, “no new costs” are needed for its delivery.

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

Evaluation and Assessment

Expected Student Learning Methods of Assessment Course Standards Outcomes Number

TESO IL L A

TESOL Standard 1: Students Direct assessment measures will include EDUC 1 1 demonstrate knowledge of exams, responses to written prompts, 667, 668, English language structures, case studies, individual student 592 English language use, second research, and classroom/video language acquisition and observations. development, and language processes to help English Language Learners (ELLs) acquire academic language and literacies specific to various content areas.

TESOL Standard 2: Students Direct assessment measures will include EDUC 2 4,5 demonstrate and apply exams, responses to written prompts, 667, 665, knowledge of the impact of and individual student research. 592 dynamic academic, personal, Performance based assessment will familial, cultural, social, and include a Valuing Diversity Project in sociopolitical contexts on the which students support colleagues, education and language encourage family engagement, and acquisition of ELLs as supported planning professional development for by research and theories. fellow educators at their home schools.

TESOL Standard 3: Students Direct assessment measures will include EDUC 3 2 plan supportive environments for exams, responses to written prompts, 570, 592 ELLs, design and implement individual student research, and standards-based instruction participation in discussion. Performance- using evidence-based, ELL- based projects will include development centered, and interactive of lesson plans, design of instructional approaches, and use and adapt materials and assessment instruments, relevant resources including field experience project (observation of appropriate technology. ESL classes & interview ESL teachers), and microteaching.

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff TESOL Standard 4: Students Direct assessment measures will include EDUC 4 3 apply assessment principles to exams, responses to written prompts, 570, 665, analyze and interpret multiple individual student research, and 592 and varied assessments for participation in discussion. ELLs, including classroom- Performance-based measures will based, standardized, and include development of lesson plans, language proficiency literacy assessments, and observation & assessments. interview of teachers, parents, and students, tutoring a group of students or teaching a whole class.

TESOL Standard 5: Students Direct assessment measures will include EDUC 5 6 demonstrate professionalism exams, responses to written prompts, 668, 570, and leadership by collaborating individual student research, and 592, 665 with other educators, knowing participation in discussion. policies and legislation and the Performance based assessment will rights of ELLs, advocating for include Valuing Diversity Project such as ELLs and their families, supporting colleagues, encouraging engaging in self-assessment family engagement, and planning and reflection pursuing Professional Development. continuous professional development, and honing their teaching practice through supervised teaching.

Explain how the proposed program, including all program objectives, will be evaluated, along with plans to track employment. Describe how assessment data will be used.

The overall evaluation design for the program will follow the model established by the Zucker Family School of Education for all its professional programs. Both direct and indirect measures will be employed, and assessment software will be used to capture data and generate summary reports for assessment and accreditation purposes.

Direct Measures

Direct evaluation measures will be built into each course in the major. Direct assessments will include both traditional and performance-based assessments. Traditional assessments will include (but will not be limited to) exams, responses to written prompts, written responses to teaching scenarios, participation in discussion forums, research projects, and student presentations. Performance-based assessments will include opportunities for educators to assess the literacy learning of ELLs, to design research-based instruction for ELLs, and to provide professional development opportunities for other educators in their school-based communities around issues focused on supporting ELLs’ language and literacy learning.

Data from a (predetermined) broad sample of these direct assessments will be catalogued within the Zucker Family School of Education assessment database using LiveText and/or Watermark software. For these assessments, students will be required to upload their work into a template, and faculty will assess the assignments using standard rubrics. These assessments and the scoring rubrics are consistent across instructors and teaching terms to allow for a significant amount of data to be collected to determine: (a) the students’ performance against established learning outcomes, (b) the psychometric integrity of the rubrics used, (c) effectiveness of the curriculum (e.g., through evaluation of student error patterns), and (d) appropriateness of the assessments themselves. 17

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff

Indirect Measures

Surveys of graduating students and employers will be conducted to assess student learning outcomes, student satisfaction with the program, and employer satisfaction with graduates. Surveys will be collected during year one, and repeated in years two and three. Satisfaction survey data will be compared over time using trend analysis. Student outcome data will be analyzed for individual graduates and across graduates from the program.

Will any of the proposed modifications impact the way the program is evaluated and assessed? If yes, explain.

☐ Yes ☒ No

Will the proposed modification affect or result in program-specific accreditation? If yes, explain; and, if the modification will result in the program seeking program-specific accreditation, provide the institution’s plans to seek accreditation, including the expected timeline.

☒ Yes ☐ No

This program will require national recognition from TESOL, a Specialized Professional Association (SPA). SPA reports are due mid-cycle, which is defined as three years prior to an EPP’s self-study report cycle. We will also participate in Annual Reviews, as defined by CAEP.

Will the proposed modification affect or lead to licensure or certification? If yes, identify the licensure or certification.

☒ Yes ☐ No

Explain how the program will prepare students for this licensure or certification.

As noted, modifications to this program will prepare students to seek add-on ESOL endorsements and/or certification from the state of South Carolina’s Department of Education. The state of South Carolina has an established ESOL endorsement and certification course route set forth in their documentation of certification routes for P-12 educators (SCDE, 2019, p. 13). As the documentation above points out, our coursework is designed to fulfill these requirements.

Please note that these program modifications will not lead to a graduate certificate from The Citadel.

If the program is an Educator Preparation Program, does the proposed certification area require national recognition from a Specialized Professional Association (SPA)? If yes, describe the institution’s plans to seek national recognition, including the expected timeline.

☐Yes ☒ No

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff The program is not an Educator Preparation Program, since it is not an initial licensure program.

References

Bryk, A. S., Sebring, P. B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S. & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Cobb, P., Jackson, K., Henrick, E., Smith, T.M., & the MIST team. (2018). Systems for instructional improvement: Creating coherence from the classroom to the district office. Harvard Education Press: Cambridge, MA.

Gee, J. P. (2008). What is academic language? In Rosebery, A. S., & Warren, B. (Eds.). Teaching Science to English Language Learners: Building on Students’ Strengths. Arlington, VA: NSTA, National Science Teachers Association, pp. 57-70.

Heineke, A., Papola-Ellis, A., Cohen, S., & Davin, K. (2018). Linguistically responsive professional development: An apprenticeship model. Improving Schools, 21(1), 32–47. https://doi.org/10.1177/1365480217732632

Kane, B. D. & Rosenquist, B. (2019). Relationships between district- and school-level policies and expectations and instructional coaches’ time use. American Educational Research Journal, 56(5), 1718–1768.

Lucas, T. & Villegas, A. M. (2013). Preparing linguistically responsive teachers: Laying the foundation in preservice teacher education, Theory Into Practice, 52(2), 98-109, DOI: 10.1080/00405841.2013.770327

Lucas, T., Villegas, A. M., & Freedson-Gonzalez, M. (2008). Linguistically responsive teacher education: Preparing classroom teachers to teach English language learners. Journal of Teacher Education, 59, 361–373.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Percentage of public school teachers who teach English Language Learner (ELL) students and students with disabilities and percentage with selected qualifications or coursework, by selected teacher and school characteristics: 2017–18. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d19/tables/dt19_209.42.asp

South Carolina Department of Education. (2019). Guidelines and Requirements for Adding Certification Fields and Endorsements. Retrieved from https://ed.sc.gov/educators/certification/certification- legislation-and-policy/certification-regulations/add-on-guidelines/.

U.S. Department of Education. (2018a). 2015–16 Consolidated state performance report, part II, section 2.11, graduation rates. Retrieved from ED Data Express, February 2018. https://eddataexpress.ed.gov/data-elements.cfm.

U.S. Department of Education. (2018b). U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 2009 and 2017 Reading Assessments. Retrieved from NAEP Data Explorer, April 2018. https://www.nationsreportcard.gov/ndecore/xplore/nde.

U. S. Department of Education. (2020). Teacher shortage areas. Retrieved from https://tsa.ed.gov/#/reports

Zehler, A. M., Fleischman, H. L., Hopstock, P. J., Pendzick, M. L., & Stephenson, T. G. (2003). Descriptive study of services to LEP students and LEP students with disabilities (No. 4 Special topic report: findings on special education LEP students). Development Associates, Inc.: Arlington, VA.

Appendix A: 19

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff Proposed Program of Study for the MEd in Literacy Education (30 hours)

*EDUC 668—Principles and Strategies for Teaching ESOL to PK-12 Learners (3 credit hours) This is a foundational course in the ways that teachers, K-12 and across content areas, can support the learning of students whose first language is not English. The course highlights developmental trajectories related to second language acquisition, compares and contrasts them to first language acquisition, and supports educators in using theory and research to design effective learning environments.

*EDUC 667: Linguistics for Educators (3 credit hours) This course introduces the areas of linguistics, such as phonology, morphology, syntax, semantics, pragmatics, and other related areas that are most applicable to teach English Language Learners (ELLs). Students will understand the English language features and how those features impact ELLs in the classroom. Students will learn instructional strategies related to each linguistic component, gather linguistic data of ELLs using various language and literacy assessment tools, and use those data to develop language and literacy activities.

*EDUC 665—Cultural and Linguistic Diversity in Education (3 credit hours) This course will address major theories and instructional strategies related to equity in education, including foundational ideas related to opportunity gaps in education, the myth of the meritocracy, the dangers of colorblindness, and the influence of stereotype threat and deficit thinking on learning. The course will trace policy and practice related to desegregation and English-only policies in schools. It will also introduce students to culturally responsive and culturally sustaining pedagogies.

*EDUC 570: Teaching Reading and Writing with ELLs and Students from Historically Marginalized Communities (3 credit hours) This course will introduce students to historical relationships between literacy, culture, socioeconomic status, and power. Through that lens, students will learn about and enact culturally responsive and sustaining pedagogies in reading and writing, focusing on how to support students whose first language is not English, as well as speakers of a range of dialects.

*EDUC-592: Teaching Language and Literacy across the Content Areas (3 credit hours) A course that examines how teachers can teach disciplinary and academic literacies by leveraging the power of students’ home languages. The primary goal of the course is to deepen candidates’ knowledge of the reading and writing processes in order to enable them to effectively design and implement literacy instruction across content areas, especially in the secondary grades when instructional support for literacy frequently tapers off.

EDUC 588: Foundations of Literacy (3 credit hours) A foundational course designed to focus on developing literacy skills across the grade levels. The developmental process of literacy growth will be considered in light of the influence of culture, identity, and primary language on literacy. Prominent theories of 20

ACAP, 3/25/2021 3.ff reading will be explored, and students will learn instructional approaches for supporting phonological awareness and phonics, word recognition, vocabulary, fluency, and comprehension skills.

EDUC 591: Practicum in Literacy Assessment and Instruction (3 credit hours) A course examining and providing practice with formal and informal assessments used to target children’s literacy strengths and identify areas needing improvement. Participants will consider adaptations and modifications for a range of readers, including students whose first language is not English, as well as students who have been designated either as below grade level or as gifted and talented. Participants will then assess one such student to understand the student’s strengths in literacy and areas of growth. Participants will undertake 15 hours of fieldwork in which they plan and enact instruction based on the assessment results.

*EDUC 608: Instructional Approaches in Teaching Fiction and Non-fiction for Children and Adolescents (3 credit hours) This course will focus on the selection of award winning and multicultural literature, non- fiction, and multimodal texts for children and adolescents. It will highlight how educators can select texts and design instruction to: increase P-12 students’ motivation for reading, ensure relevance and authenticity in instruction, and make certain that multiple cultures and backgrounds are represented in the curriculum. Instructional practices for teaching fiction, non-fiction, and multimodal texts to diverse student bodies will be emphasized.

*EDUC-642—Coaching in Literacy Education (3 credit hours) This course introduces students to the role of literacy coaching (K- 12). Students learn to provide support for teachers and the school community as a whole. As part of this class, students will create a professional development presentation and lead a teacher inquiry group on a topic related to literacy. This course will include topics related to modeling instruction, observing and providing feedback, and creating a literacy plan for a classroom or school.

*EDUC-512—Data Collection and Analysis (3 credit hours) Coursework designed to introduce the graduate student to quantitative methods to include construction of assessment instruments, analysis, and interpretation of quantitative data. Students will be required to develop minimum competence in use of microcomputers for descriptive statistical analyses and word processing. Emphasis will be placed on the development of skills in critical analysis of literature relating to effective schools. This ability to analyze research data should result in improved by professional performance.