Professor Joanne Larson
Time: Tuesdays, 4:30 - 8:15 p.m.
Room: Dewey 1-160B
Office Hours: Tuesdays 3:30 - 4:30 p.m.
Phone: 275-0900
E-mail: joanne.larson@rochester.edu

Course Objective:

The purpose of this course is to assist students in the construction of a comprehensive theoretical framework for understanding and examining the social construction of literacy in the context of elementary school. Particular attention will be paid to issues of cultural, linguistic, and physical/mental diversity. The course will provide students with the opportunity to apply these theoretical understandings to classroom practice through classroom research, curriculum development, and curriculum implementation. We will meet with Dan Osborn’s class on teaching in inclusive classrooms three times during the semester. These joint class sessions will provide an opportunity to have a meaningful discussion about teaching literacy to all children.

Course Requirements:

1. Analytic/Reflective Comments: Students will submit 4 brief written analyses (no longer than two double-spaced pages) of the assigned readings due at times noted in the syllabus. This activity is designed to promote class discussion by helping students focus on substantive issues presented in the readings and to foster an understanding of the relationship between theory, practice, and individual experience. This paper should reflect the student’s analysis and emerging understanding of the readings and should not be a summary (20% of the grade).

2. Literacy Curriculum Framework: Students will write a literacy curriculum that is based on the theoretical understandings of literacy learning and classroom practice gained from course readings and assignments. This curriculum will include a theoretical framework, a discussion of the goals of the curriculum, a rationale for these goals, a description of classroom roles (learner and teacher), a description of activities and the classroom, and methods of evaluation. (30% of grade)

3. Integrated Lessons: Each student will construct and implement an integrated language arts/math (social studies/science) unit that includes a series of lessons composed of guided or shared reading lesson, a modeled writing lesson, and an inquiry-based mathematics lesson. The assignment will include written lesson plans and associated written paper that reflects the student’s experience conducting the unit. At least one lesson conducted during this unit will constitute one of the required fall observations. Lesson plans must be submitted to the student teaching supervisor prior to observation. (20% of grade)

4. Research Project: This project introduces students to the idea of teacher as researcher and is designed to promote an understanding of the important relationship between theory, research, and effective practice. Students will be required to conduct a classroom-based research project that focuses on a specific literacy issue in their own teaching and write a research paper that includes the following: a focused research question with a rationale for selecting this particular issue (significance of the problem); a theoretical framework in which the research question is embedded; a description of the context; method of data collection; data presentation and analysis; and a discussion/reflection section. (20% of grade)

5. Final Exam (10% of grade)

I DO NOT ACCEPT LATE ASSIGNMENTS EXCEPT IN CASE OF EMERGENCY. I WILL DEDUCT ONE POINT FOR EACH DAY AN ASSIGNMENT IS LATE, WHATEVER THE REASON. NO LATE RESPONSE PAPERS WILL BE ACCEPTED AT ALL.

Grading

1. Analytic/Reflective Comments: 20 points

2. Literacy Curriculum: 30 points

3. Integrated Lessons: 20 points

4. Research Project: 20 points

5. Final Exam 10 points

Total: 100 points

10 A 8 A- 7 B+ 5 B 3 B- 2 C+ 1 C

20 A 18 A- 17 B+ 15 B 13 B- 12 C+ 10 C

30 A 28 A- 27 B+ 25 B 24 B- 23 C+ 20 C

100 A 95 A- 92 B+ 90 B 85 B- 82 C+ 80 C

Required Texts:

Atwell, N. (1998). In the middle: Writing, reading, and learning with adolescents. Second Edition. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Calkins, L. (1994). The art of teaching writing, New Edition. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Calkins, L. (2001). The art of teaching reading. New York: Longman.

Coles, G. (2000). Misreading reading: The bad science that hurts children. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Edelsky, C. (1996). With literacy and justice for all: Rethinking the social in language and education. Second Edition. London: Falmer.

NCTE: Standards for the English Language Arts

Standards in Practice, Grades K-2

Standards in Practice, Grades 3-5

Street, B. (1995). Social literacies: Critical approaches to literacy in development, ethnography, and education. New York: Longman. *

Various articles handed out in class. Copy fee required.

Recommended Texts:

Dyson, A. H. (1993). Social worlds of children learning to write in an urban primary school. New York: Teachers College Press.

Graves, D. (1994). A fresh look at writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

* Carried over from the Seminar in Literacy Learning

Class Schedule:

September 4

Overview of the course and introduction to current debates in literacy.

Student teaching supervisors attend to set up observations.

September 11

Draft of Letter of Expectations Due

Perspectives on Literacy

Readings:

Edelsky, C. -- Chapter 5

Freebody, P., Luke, A., & Gilbert, P. (1991). Reading positions and practices in the classroom. Curriculum Inquiry, 21(4), 435-457.

Moll, L. (1990). Introduction. In L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and Education: Instructional implications of sociohistorical psychology, pp. 1-27. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Atwell, N. -- Chapters 1 & 2

Coles, G. – Chapter 1

September 18

Analytic/Reflective Comments #1 Due

Whole Language, Reading and Writing Workshop, and Reading Recovery

Readings:

Clay, M. & Cazden, C. (1990). A Vygotskian interpretation of Reading Recovery. In L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and Education: Instructional implications of sociohistorical psychology, pp. 206-222. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Goodman, Y & Goodman, K. (1990). Vygotsky in a whole-language perspective. L. Moll (Ed.), Vygotsky and Education: Instructional implications of sociohistorical psychology, pp. 223-250. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Edelsky, C. -- Chapters 6 & 8

Atwell, N. -- Chapters 4-6

Calkins, L. -- Chapter 21 (Writing)

Calkins, L. – Section I (Reading)

Recommended:

Graves, D. -- Chapters 1-2

September 25

Final Letter of Expectations Due

Curriculum Development and Planning

JOINT CLASS SESSION WITH DAN OSBORN

Readings:

NCTE Language Arts Standards

NCTE Standards in Practice (both booklets)

Hunter, M. (1984). Knowing, teaching, and supervising. ASCD Yearbook.

Bloome, D., Puro, P., & Theodorou, E. (1989). Procedural display and classroom lessons. Curriculum Inquiry, 19:3, 265-291.

Stainback, S. & Stainbeck, W. (1996). Curriculum in inclusive classrooms: The background. In S. Stainback & W. Stainback (Eds.) Inclusion: A guide for educators, pp. 203-208. Baltimore: Brookes.

Calkins, L. -- Chapters 11 & 12 (Writing)

Coles, G. – Chapters 2-3

Recommended:

Graves, D. -- Chapters 4-9

October 2

Analytic/Reflective Comments #2 Due

Teaching Writing

Readings:

Coles, G. – Chapters 4-6

Calkins, L. -- Section II (Writing)

Atwell, N. -- Chapter 10

Recommended:

Atwell, N. -- Chapters 11-14

October 9

Literacy Curriculum due

Integrating Conventions

Readings:

Atwell, N. -- Chapters 7-9

Calkins, L. -- Chapters 13 – 18 (Writing)

Coles, G. – Chapters 7-10

Stahl, S., Duffy-Hester, A., & Stahl, K. (1998). Everything you wanted to know about phonics (but were afraid to ask). Reading Research Quarterly, 33(3), 338-355.

Dahl, K., Scharer, P., & Lawson, L. (1999). Phonics instruction and student achievement in whole language first-grade classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(3), 312-341.

Recommended:

Graves, D. -- Chapters 12-16

October 16 ((end of first six weeks))

Draft of Unit and Lessons Plans Due

Questioning Process Approaches

Readings:

Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom, pp. xi - 69. New York: The New Press.

Lensmire, T. (1994). When children write: Critical re-visions of the writing workshop, pp. vii-23. New York: Teachers College Press.

Willinsky, J. (1990). The new literacy: Redefining reading and writing in the schools, pp.26-64. New York: Routledge.

Student teaching supervisors attend to discuss field experience.

October 23

Analytic/Reflective Comments #3 Due

Grouping

JOINT CLASS SESSION WITH DAN OSBORN

Readings:

Gutierrez, K., Larson, J., Rymes, B., & Stone, L. (in press). Constructing classrooms as communities of learners: Literacy learning in urban contexts. In Challenging a single standard: Multiple perspectives on literacy. New York: Teachers College Press.

O’Neil, J. (1992). On tracking and individual differences: A conversation with Jeannie Oakes. Educational Leadership, 50(2), 18-21.

Gamoran, A. (1992). Is ability grouping equitable? Educational Leadership, 11-13.

Rethinking Schools -- Part III

October 30

Classroom Literacy

Readings:

Edelsky, C. -- Chapter 7

Rethinking Schools (1995). Language arts section, pp. 109 - 135

Kress, G. (2000). Early spelling: Between convention and creativity. (pp. 1-26). New York: Routledge.

Recommended:

Dyson, A. -- Chapters 2 -4 & 9

Graves, D. -- Chapters 18-22

November 6

Analytic/Reflective Comments #3 Due

Connecting Home and School Literacy Practices/Language and Culture

Readings:

Calkins, L. -- Chapters 6 & 28 (Writing)

Schieffelin, B. & Cochran-Smith, M. (1984). Learning to read culturally: Literacy before schooling. In Goelman, H., Oberg, A., & Smith, F. (Eds.), Awakening to literacy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Ochs, E. (1988). Literacy instruction in a Samoan village, pp. 189-209. Culture and language development. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

November 13

What is Classroom Management Anyway?

JOINT CLASS SESSION WITH DAN OSBORN

Readings:

Calkins, L. – Section II (Reading)

Chapter 5 (pp. 317-375). In Short, K., Harste, J., & Burke, C. (1996). Creating classrooms for authors and inquirers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

November 20

Analytic/Reflective Comments #4 Due

Language in the Classroom

Readings:

Dyson, A. (1987). The value of “time off task”: Young children’s spontaneous talk and deliberate text. Harvard Educational Review, 57(4), 396-420.

Gutierrez, K., Baquedano-Lopez, P., & Turner, M. (1997). Putting language back into language arts: When the radical middle meets the third space. Language Arts, 74(5), 368-378.

Calkins, L. – Section III (Reading)

Recommended:

Calkins, L. – Section IV (Reading)

November 27 ((end of second six weeks))

Integrated Unit Paper Due

Assessment

Readings:

Edelsky, C. -- Chapter 9

Calkins, L. -- Chapter 19 (Writing)

Rethinking Schools (1995). Standardized tests: A clear and present danger, pp. 175-184

Murphy, S. (1998). Fragile evidence: A critique of reading assessment, Chapters 5 & 6. London: Erlbaum.

Teacher Article One (pp. 63-79). In Short, K., Harste, J., & Burke, C. (1996). Creating classrooms for authors and inquirers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Student teaching supervisors attend to discuss observations.

Recommended:

Graves, D. -- Chapters 10 & 11

December 4

Shifting Perspectives on Literacy

Readings:

Street, B. -- Chapters 6 & 8

Edelsky, C. -- Chapter 11

New London Group. (2000). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. In B. Cope & M. Kalantis (Eds.). Multiliteracies: Literacy learning and the design of social futures, pp. 9-37. London: Routledge.

Luke, A. (1998). Getting over method: Literacy teaching as work in “new times.” Language Arts, 75(4), 305-313.

Recommended for your library:

Coles, G. (1998). Reading lessons. New York: Hill and Wang

Marciano, J. (1997). Civic illiteracy: Battle for the hearts and minds of American youth. New York: Lang.

Shannon, P. (1998). Reading Poverty. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Taylor, D. (1998). Beginning to read and the spin doctors of science: The political campaign to change America’s mind about how children learn to read. Urbana, Ill: National Council of Teachers of English.

Kohn, A. (2000). The case against standardized testing: Raising the scores, ruining the schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

December 11

Research Paper Due

Class presentations and discussion

Student teaching supervisors attend for summative discussion of fall student teaching experience.

December 14

Final Exams due by 5 p.m.