1

Graduate School of Education and Allied Professions Department of Psychological and Educational Consultation

Reading and Language Development

RLD 583: Tests and Measurement in Reading and Language Arts Contexts

Essential Compoent(s) Addressed in Course Grade Levels Candidates Interact With

Course Instructor: Jule McCombes-Tolis, Ph.D. Office: CNS 119 Office Hours: Email: jmccombes-tolis@fairfield.edu Phone: Catalog Description: This course introduces candidates to the principles and practices of scientifically based research interventions (SRBI), with consideration for the environmental, cultural, social, linguistic, behavioral, and cognitive factors that contribute to literacy development. Candidates learn: how to use a variety of screening, diagnostic and progress monitoring assessments to identify students at risk of reading failure, including those at risk for Dyslexia; how to use assessment data to support the development of targeted interventions; and, how to use graphing and charting practices to identify the strength of students’ response to interventions provided. (3 credits)

PHONEMICAWARENESS

PHONICS

FLUENCY

VOCABULARY

COMPREHENSION

WRITTENEXPRESSION

ASSESSMENT

X

Grades1-3

• ScreeningAssessmentReport• ProgressMonitoringCaseStudy

Grades4-8

• DiagnosicAssessmentReport• IndividualizedReadingPlan

Grades9-12

• ProgressMonitoringCaseStudy

2

Course Description: Candidates in this course learn about how progress monitoring can affect the academic outcomes of students, how to implement curriculum based measurement with a classroom of students, how to use progress monitoring data to determine if a student is meeting the established performance criteria or if more intensive intervention is warranted, and how to adapt instruction for greater intensity and individualization. Candidates also explore ways to build support for Scientific Research-Based Instruction (SRBI), as well as various methods of collecting, evaluating, and reporting data. Required Texts and Materials:

• Echevarria,J.,Richards-Tutor,C.,&Vogt,M.E.(2015).Responsetointervention(RTI)andEnglishlearnersusingtheSIOPmodel.UpperSaddleRiver,NJ:Pearson.(ISBN10:0-13-343107-X/13:978-0-13-343107-0)

• Hosp,M.K.,Hosp,J.L,&Howell,K.W.(2016).TheABCsofCBM–2ndEdition:Apracticalguidetocurriculum-basedmeasurement.GuilfordPress:NewYork,NY.

• IESPracticeGuide:https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/rti_reading_pg_021809.pdf • Kilpatrick,D.A.(2015).Essentialsofassessing,preventing,andovercomingreadingdifficulties.JohnWiley

&Sons:Hoboken,NJ. • Spear-Swerling,L.(2014).ThepowerofRTIandreadingprofiles:Ablueprintforsolvingreading

problems.BrookesPublishing:Baltimore,MD. Modes of Instruction: This course includes:

● Lecture with supported PowerPoint presentations ● Reading assignments ● Whole and small group discussion and activities ● Video/media clips ● Computer training applications

Candidate Learning Outcomes and Their Relationship to Professional Standards and Assignments

3

Learner Outcome Upon Completion of this Course, Candidates Will be Able to…

ILA Standards Assignment

1. demonstrate understanding of the differences (test construction, purpose, terminology) among screening, diagnostic, outcome, and progress-monitoring assessments

3.1 Midterm

2. select and implement a variety of assessments to identify children at risk for reading failure

3.2

4.1

Screening Assessment

Report 3. demonstrate an understanding of the principles of progress-

monitoring and ability to implement those principles 3.3 Progress

Monitoring Case Study

4. administer and interpret diagnostic surveys of phonological skills, decoding skills, oral reading skills, spelling, and writing 3.2, 3.3

Diagnostic Reading

Assessment Report

5. interpret and report assessment results to a variety of audiences 3.4

Individualized Reading Plan

6. demonstrate their ability to utilize a variety of classroom configurations and routines to support reading and writing instruction in a manner that is equitable for ELLs

5.3, 5.4

4.3

Midterm Exam

Assignments and Evaluation Criteria:

1. Midterm Exam

4

20% of Final Grade ILA Standards Addressed: 4.3, 5.3, 5.4 The purpose of this assignment is to ensure that candidates understand how to use appropriate routines and a variety of classroom configurations to support reading and writing instruction. Candidates will complete a take home case study format examination that presents them with a classroom profile and asks them to create instructional groupings to address students’ developmental reading and writing needs. Candidates are to:

• Identify when and how they would group students homogeneously and heterogeneously, with justification

• Identify the instructional considerations that should be made to equitably serve the needs of English Language Learners

• Identify how they would organize the classroom environment (to include a designated teaching area, worktable, and work stations), with justification

• Create a sample daily schedule to help organize allotted instructional time, with justification

o Identify how they will monitor the use of instructional time • Create a rotation chart to guide students, and identify how it is that students would be

oriented to routines and rotations

2. Dyslexia Risk Screener 15% of Final Grade ILA Standards Addressed: 3.1, 3.2, 3.3 The purpose of this assignment is to provide candidates with the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of reading screening procedures for students in Grade 1. Candidates will administer a dyslexia screener to a student in the Fall of Grade 1 that features a Level I Checklist and a Level 2 Screener. Typically, only those students for whom a Level I Checklist item is flagged would be administered the Level 2 Screener. Here, all students will be administered the Level 2 Screener in order to support candidate training. Candidates in this course will be introduced to the screening protocols utilized by the Mississippi Dyslexia Therapy Association Candidates will generate a brief analysis of findings, noting which portions (if any) of the screener the student has failed and what next steps for evaluation should be.

3. Informal Reading Assessment Report 25% of Final Grade

5

ILA Standards Addressed: 3.2, 3.3, 3.4 The purpose of this assignment is to provide candidates with the opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of how to administer and interpret appropriate assessments for students, especially those who struggle with reading and writing. Candidates will administer a series of informal diagnostic assessments to a student in Grade 4-8. Afterwards, candidates will summarize findings according to a sample protocol provided, taking care to identify if the student is performing at Benchmark/Tier I, Strategic/Tier II, or Intensive /Tier III levels of need. Assessments are to include the following:

• CORE Reading Maze Comprehension Test • DIBELS Oral Reading Fluency

o GE Test of Coding, if Warranted • CORE Vocabulary Screening • CORE Graded High-Frequency Word Survey • San Diego Quick Assessment of Reading Ability

4. Individualized Reading Plan

30% of Final Grade ILA Standards Addressed: 3.3, 3.4, 4.3

The purposes of the Individualized Reading Plan assignment is to assess your abilities to use assessment information to plan and evaluate instruction.

Expectations for the Individualized Reading Plan: Candidates will develop an Individualized Reading Plan for an assigned student in Grades 4-8 whom they have already evaluated in order to complete a pre-cursor assignment: Informal Diagnostic Reading Assessment (see: RLD 560: Assignment 3). Candidates are to review the results of the Informal Diagnostic Reading Assessment in order to identify the skills that require additional instructional attention in the context of either Tier 2 or Tier 3 interventions. Candidates are to utilize the print and electronic intervention planning protocol developed by Jung and Swan (2011), provided, in order to articulate an intervention and progress monitoring plan for each identified skill. This plan will require candidates to articulate the following for each identified skill:

ü An achievement target ü Instructional objectives (anchored to CCSS) ü An interventionist ü Evidence-based strategies to support instruction ü Special considerations for English Language Learners ü Recommended materials ü Number of days per week the skill is to be serviced

6

ü Amount of time per session the skill is to be serviced ü Group size the skill can be serviced in ü What the home component is to support transfer ü The progress monitoring tool, schedule, and decision rules that will be used to monitor student progress To document your work, submit the following: 1. InformalDiagnosticReadingAssessmentReport:thisisrequiredtosupport theevaluationofyourIndividualizedReadingPlan2. IndividualizedReadingPlan3. Reflectionthatprovidesajustificationfortheplanthatyou’vedeveloped.

Thisjustificationshouldincludeevidencethatyouhaveconsidered:(a)majortheoriesandempiricalresearchindecidingontheelementsofyourplan;and,(b)thestudent’suniquecognitive,linguistic,andculturalidentitiesindevelopingyourplan

5. Progress Monitoring Case Study

10% of Final Grade ILA Standards Addressed: 3.3 The purpose of this assignment is to provide candidates with the opportunity to review progress monitoring case study data in order to determine if a given student is making adequate progress, or if the student’s intervention should be adjusted and if so, how. Candidates will be provided with an IRIS Center Case Study and will work in teams of four to engage an in-class case study assignment.

Tentative Course Calendar:

Date Topic Readings and Assignments Due ILA Standards

7

READING FOUNDATIONS Week 1 • Introductions

• The Gap Between Reading Research and Practice

• How Reading is Often Taught and Why it Does Not Work for Struggling Readers

Kilpatrick, Pages 1-45 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 4.1

Week 2 • Componential and Simple View of Reading

• Path To Proficient Reading

Kilpatrick, Pages 46-79 Spear-Swerling, Pages 19-56

1.1, 1.2, 1.3

Week 3 • Mixed-Type Reading Difficulties

• Role of Teacher Effectiveness in Children’s Reading Achievement

Kilpatrick Chapter 4 and 5 Spear-Swerling Chapters 9, 10

1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 4.1

BASICS OF RTI/SRBI Week 4 • Two Approaches

to RTI• Research Based

Practices for Assessment in Reading

• RTI for English Language Learners

• Handouts: Center on Response to Intervention

Echevarria et. al., chapter 1 http://www.ideapartnership.org/documents/TwoApproachesRTI.pdf Herrell/Jordan Pages 162-168 Spear-Swerling Chapter 5 Complete the following IRIS Center Module: http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti02-assessment/

1.1, 1.3

Week 5 • Tier 2 and Tier 3 Interventions for English Learners

• Data Based Decision Making

Echevarria et. al., chapter 1 IES Practice Guide: https://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/pdf/practice_guides/rti_reading_pg_021809.pdf

3.1

Week 6 • Instructional Grouping configurations

Herrell/Jordan Strategy 38, 42, 43, 47 Gibson/Hasbrouck Pages 1-55

1.1, 3.3

8

• Co-Teaching Models

Week 7 • Monitoring Pacing, Establishing Routines

Gibson/Hasbrouck Pages 56-71 1.1, 1.3, 3.1, 3.3, 3.4

Week 8 MIDTERM EXAM MIDTERM EXAM 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 3.1, 3.3, 3.44.1

CURRICULUM BASED MEASUREMENT Week 9 • CBM for

Assessment and Problem Solving

• Assessment and Data Based Decision Making for English Learners

Echevarria et. al., chapter 3 http://www.ideapartnership.org/documents/TwoApproachesRTI.pdf Hosp et al. Chapters 1 and 2

3.1, 3.2, 3.3

Saturday

How to Conduct, Reading, Early Reading, Spelling and Writing CBM

Hosp et al. Chapters 3-6 3.1, 3.2, 3.3

INFORMAL DIAGNOSTIC READING ASSESSMENT Week 10

Purpose of Informal Diagnostic Assessment Overview of CORE Measures by Grade

Screening Assessment Report Due 3.1, 3.2, 3.3

INSTRUCTIONAL GROUPING PRACTICES Week 11

Developing an Individualized Reading Plan Grouping for Instruction (Revisited)

Gibson & Hasbrouck, Chapter 1, 2, 3 Diagnostic Assessment Report Due

3.2, 3.3, 3.4

Week 12

Organizing Classrooms and Schedules Rotation Charts and Flexible Grouping

Complete the following IRIS Center Module: http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti03-reading/

Individualized Reading Plan Due

3.3, 3.4

MONITORING PROGRESS Week 13

Charting and Graphing Data

Hosp et al. Chapter 8 3.3

Week 14

Case Study Applications: Progress Monitoring

IRIS Center Case Study Applications 3.3

Statement Concerning Assessment and Monitoring of Candidates’ Attitudes and Dispositions:_________

9

The Reading and Language Development (RLD) program’s Professional Dispositions Assessment identifies the personal and professional qualities and characteristics expected of program candidates. These qualities and characteristics reflect the professional attributes that are central to the mission of the Graduate School of Education and Allied Professions (GSEAP). Professional dispositions are considered during the application process, coursework, field placements and practicum experiences, and are factored into the awarding of final grades, as noted on course syllabi. Formal evaluation occurs in the following courses/practicum experiences: RLD/SE 429; RLD 591; RLD 550; RLD 504; RLD 535; RLD 592. Faculty and program support staff (e.g. Mentors, Master Teachers, Practicum Administrators, etc.) may flag concerns at any point however, during a candidate’s progress through the program. Complete information may be found on the program’s website. Candidates are advised that concerns raised in relation to attitudes and dispositions may result in the lowering of the their final course grade, per the discretion of faculty. Candidates with Disabilities: ____ Fairfield University is committed to providing qualified candidates with disabilities an equal opportunity to access the benefits, rights and privileges of its services, programs and activities, in an accessible setting. For some candidates, equal opportunity involves the University making reasonable accommodations. However, the University is under no obligation to alter the essential academic elements of courses or programs. If a candidate with a disability would like to be considered for accommodations, he/she must contact the Office of Academic and Disability Support Services. http://www.fairfield.edu/candidate/adss_candidate.html Approximate Grade Cut Points: Candidates are advised that the following grading cut points are approximate. Patterns of tardiness and/or absence, a lack of appropriate attitudes and dispositions – significant enough to warrant intervention on behalf of this faculty member (e.g. a meeting, or letter of concern)- will result in the lowering of a candidate’s overall grade by as much as a full letter grade. Approximate final grade cut points are as follows:

A+ 99-100

B+ 88-89

C+ 78-79

D+ 68-69

F <60

A 93-98

B 83-87

C 73-77

D 63-67

A- 90-92

B- 80-82

C- 70-72

D- 60-62

10

INTERNATIONAL LITERACY ASSOCIATION (ILA) STANDARDS ADDRESSED IN PROGRAM

Standard 1: Foundational Knowledge 1.1 Candidates understand major theories and empirical research that describe the cognitive, linguistic, motivational, and sociocultural foundations of reading and writing development, processes, and components, including word recognition, language comprehension, strategic knowledge, and reading–writing connections.

1.2 Candidates understand the historically shared knowledge of the profession and changes over time in the perceptions of reading and writing development, processes, and components. 1.3 Candidates understand the role of professional judgment and practical knowledge for improving all students’ reading development and achievement. Standard 2: Curriculum and Instruction 2.1 Candidates use foundational knowledge to design or implement an integrated, comprehensive and balanced curriculum.

2.2 Candidates use appropriate and varied instructional approaches, including those that develop word recognition, language comprehension, strategic knowledge, and reading–writing connections. 2.3 Candidates use a wide range of texts (e.g., narrative, expository, and poetry) from traditional print, digital, and online resources. Standard 3: Assessment and Evaluation 3.1. Candidates understand types of assessments and their purposes, strengths, and limitations.

3.2 Candidates select, develop, administer, and interpret assessments, both traditional print and electronic, for specific purposes. 3.3 Candidates use assessment information to plan and evaluate instruction. 3.4 Candidates communicate assessment results and implications to a variety of audiences. Standard 4: Diversity 4.1 Candidates recognize, understand, and value the forms of diversity that exist in society and their importance in learning to read and write.

4.2 Candidates use a literacy curriculum and engage in instructional practices that positively impact students’ knowledge, beliefs, and engagement with the features of diversity. 4.3 Candidates develop and implement strategies to advocate for equity.

Standard 5: Literate Environment 5.1 Candidates design the physical environment to optimize students’ use of traditional print, digital, and online resources in reading and writing instruction. 5.2 Candidates design a social environment that is low risk and includes choice, motivation, and scaffolded support to optimize students’ opportunities for learning to read and write. 5.3 Candidates use routines to support reading and writing instruction (e.g., time allocation, transitions from one activity to another, discussions, and peer feedback. 5.4 Candidates use a variety of classroom configurations (i.e., whole class, small group, and individual) to differentiate instruction.

Standard 6: Professional Learning and Leadership 6.1 Candidates demonstrate foundational knowledge of adult learning theories and related research about organizational change, professional development, and school culture. 6.2 Candidates display positive dispositions related to their own reading and writing and the teaching of reading and writing, and pursue the development of individual professional knowledge and behaviors. 6.3 Candidates participate in, design, facilitate, lead, and evaluate effective and differentiated professional development programs. 6.4 Candidates understand and influence local, state, or national policy decisions.

11

Course Sequence and the primary International Literacy Standards addressed in each course. Courses are listed in order to reflect the typical program sequence for candidates.

Course numbers are assigned by the Registrar and do not reflect order or hierarchy.

429 529 550 591 560 535 504 565 592 FOUNDATIONAL KNOWLEDGE 1.1 X X X X X X X 1.2 X X X 1.3 X X CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION 2.1 X X X X X X X X 2.2 X X X X X X X X 2.3 X X X X X X X ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION 3.1 X X X X X X X 3.2 X X X X X X X X X 3.3 X X X X X X X 3.4 X X X X X X DIVERSITY 4.1 X X X X X 4.2 X X X X X X 4.3 X X X LITERATE ENVIORNMENT 5.1 X X X X X 5.2 X X X X 5.3 X X X X X X 5.4 X X X X X PROFESSIONAL LEARNING AND LEADERSHIP 6.1 X X X 6.2 X X X X 6.3 X X X X X 6.4 X

12