MDE Folio NS Graduate: Summary

Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (NS)

Graduate/Master’s Level Endorsement for Certified Teachers

Phase I, Summary

Cover | Overview | Requirements | Summary

Spring Arbor University
May 31, 2012

Claim Statements Alignment to Standards Key Assessments Rubrics, Scoring Guides, and/or other Identifiers Placement within Program
Candidates will emerge from the program with deep subject matter knowledge as evidenced by good performance in each course in the program and on key knowledge artifacts from TSL 600. Required by MDE; institutional expectation for Spring Arbor graduate students 90% of students will earn a “B” or higher in each TSL class, to show that most students are understanding the subject matter as they progress.* Defined in each course syllabus* Graduation audit for each student performed each semester by program coordinator*
Required by MDE; also standards 2.0, 3.0, 6.0 (see crosstalk table in course syllabus) 90% of students will earn a “B” or higher on a practicum e-portfolio developed in TSL 600 that covers artifacts generated from across the entire TESOL curriculum and field experiences. In the portfolio, candidates provide evidence of how he or she met each standard for the age group of students taught in the Practicum; they will state the standard, describe the artifact, and provide a rationale for choosing the artifact as evidence of the standard, provide digital copy of artifact (video, photo, document). Assignment graded in
Required by MDE; also standards 2.0, 3.0, 6.0 (see crosstalk table in course syllabus) 90% of students will earn a “B” or higher on a literature review of an issue from one of the following areas: second language acquisition; teaching practices for beginning, intermediate or advanced ELLs; assessment practices; language structures; role of culture and language development; or reading and writing development of ELLs. The topic for the paper will be approved prior to the course by the professor or program director. The final paper will be 10-12 pages and have 10-12 professional journal or book references. There will be 2 reviews of the progress (drafts) on the paper prior to the final evaluation. The annotated reference lists produced in courses in the program are meant to be a guiding element for the final topic and literature review. Assignment graded in
Candidates will identify learner needs and design targeted instruction based on the identified need. Standard 5.0 (see crosstalk table in course syllabus) 90% of students will earn a “B” or higher on the TSL 505 case study: assessment of listening, speaking, reading, and writing. You will meet with and conduct 7-10 different kinds of assessments with the student, including the assessments across the domains of listening, speaking, reading, and writing using the Michigan English Language Proficiency Standards as your guide (along with the resources provided in the course). This case study will entail a detailed report of the administration and results of these assessment instruments, the implications of the results for instruction, and a critical evaluation of the testing instruments themselves. As a “Next Step” Assignment: Analyze an ELL student’s assessment results and create a plan for their future instruction based on their strengths and weaknesses. Case study papers should have 5 to 10 double-spaced pages (excluding title page, references, and appendices), and include a minimum of 3 references, with at least 2 references from outside course readings, drawn from academic journals or books on L2 assessment. During the last week of class, students present their Case Study findings via Blackboard Discussion Board Post. Assignment graded in
Candidates will create instruction to promote the development of reading and writing skills for English Language Learners. Standards 3.0, 4.0, 6.0 (see crosstalk table in course syllabus) 90% of students will earn a “B” or higher on the TSL 506 case study: moving an ELL forward in the areas of both writing and reading. From the information provided [in course] candidates determine if his or her case study student is a beginning or intermediate writer. They then Implement one of the writing strategies either from the Beginning Writing or Intermediate Writing sections. Next, they collect the writing sample from this lesson, and using the Scale of Writing Development and other information provided earlier in the course they evaluate the stage of writing. Candidates then write their evaluation of the lesson and the writing produced by his or her case study student, and make recommendations for further instruction in writing.Based on the student’s age and the Oral Language Proficiency level determined earlier in the course, candidates determine the section of the text they will use to choose book and focus for the comprehension lesson. They will choose a focus skill: making sense, asking questions, visualizing, inferring, or determining importance in non fiction. Candidates will then use the basic steps of the lesson given earlier in the course and plot the lesson elements onto the SIOP Lesson Plan Checklist form, being sure to include English Language objectives and Language Arts objectives for K-8 and/or K-12. in the SIOP lesson format. Candidates then implement the lesson. Afterwards, they write a reflection that includes: 1) a description of reading and language level of student or group, 2) why a specific focus strategy was chosen, 3) a short description of the implementation process (what you did), 4) his or her assessment of the effect on student learning of the lesson, 5) what changes he or she would at the next use of the lesson, 6) the lesson plan using the SIOP Lesson Plan Checklist format, and 7) the role of culture and family on the language acquisition and literacy development of the Case Study student. Assignment graded in
Candidates will use a SIOP (sheltered instruction, observation protocol) model for literacy instruction in content areas Standards 2.0, 4.0 (see crosstalk table in course syllabus) 90% of students will earn a “B” or higher on the TSL 509 SIOP unit plan. Students will practice developing the multiple features of the SIOP Model for 3 lessons in a content area unit plan, receive feedback, and submit a final developed unit plan in a content area. Group evaluation of the unit plan will be based on the evaluation rubric for the SIOP lesson. Students will post a description of their own plan and provide feedback to others on their unit plans before final grading. The final revised unit plan will be submitted along with the group comments and suggestions for revision to successfully address all the areas of the SIOP format. The 3 SIOP lessons can each earn 6.25% of the course grade Assignment graded in
Candidates will design appropriate personal professional development plans for continued growth of educators based on personal assessment of performances of ESL students based on TESOL and NBPTS. Standards 1.0, 2.0, 3.0, 4.0, 5.0, 6.0 (see crosstalk table in course syllabus) 90% of students will earn a “B” or higher on the TSL 600 Professional Development Plan (PDP).
  1. Comprehensive Evaluation of Strengths and Weakness – Candidates write a Self-Evaluation of the Strengths and Weaknesses of how well he or she meets each of the Nine National Board for Professional Teaching Standards based on the age level they have most experience teaching. These reflections are based on all their prior teaching experiences and the current teaching in the practicum setting. These are the Standards to address: knowledge of student; knowledge of culture and diversity; home, school and community connections; knowledge of English language; knowledge of English language acquisition; instructional practices; assessment; teacher as learner; professional leadership and advocacy
  2. Evaluate and Plan for English Language Improvement – Candidates evaluate his or her current knowledge of the English Language (including vocabulary and grammar in writing and speaking) and their proficiency in using English for speaking, reading and writing. Candidates must also provide evidence of the basis for the evaluation, and write a plan for continued development.
  3. Evaluation and Plan for Improvement of Instructional Practices – Candidates evaluate his or her proficiency in providing good Instructional Practices in the Practicum Setting, using Section VI of the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards for specific elements to discuss. Candidates then make a plan for improvement in areas of weakness
  4. Additional Areas for Improvement – Candidates select one of the nine Standards on the National Board for Teaching Professional Standards to develop a concrete plan for improvement based on your current self-evaluation or evaluation by other professional in the field.
 Assignment graded in

*MTTC subscale scores for the NS exam will also be used as a program assessment to check the consistency of student knowledge across the corresponding areas of knowledge. The School of Education will have an additional internal program assessment objective that 90% of all “claimed” students pass the test. These results are checked by the Dean, the Director of Accreditation and Assessment, and the program coordinator when the scores for each exam are made available as well as annually when the one-year and three-year pass rate data is received from the MDE.