COURSE DESCRIPTION AND REQUIREMENTS

Detailed Evaluation Criteria

Graduate Credit

ENGL 533: ESOL Program Development

Accelerated Career Enhancement (ACE TESOL Degree-2003)

USDE GRANT: T195N020104

Salisbury University

Course Designer: ANJALI PANDEY

Guest Professor: Dr. Tamara Lacatusu

(August 11-15) 8:30 –11:00 & 1:00 –5:00 p.m.

(Room 123: Henson Science Building)

Office: 367 Holloway Hall

Mail Box: Department of English, Holloway Hall

Phone: Office: 410-677-5387

Home: 410-572-6033

Guest Professor contact: (410-749-4190 only till August 14, 2003)

E-mail: axpandey@salisbury.edu

Office Hours: 12 - 1 (T, W), or by Appointment.

OVERVIEW OF THE COURSE[1]

This course introduces students to the theory and practice involved in developing and implementing ESOL programs in public schools with diverse newcomer language learners (K-12). In exploring the complexities involved in planning, developing, and implementing an ESOL program, students will be made aware of educational law, funding priorities, as well as the cultural and socio-political factors impacting programmatic and curricular decisions both at the macro level (county, statewide and national) and the micro level (school policies, plans and personnel configurations). The course affords students the opportunity to explore the complexities involved in developing and implementing innovative ESOL programs, and sensitizes students to the cultural conflicts and biases, both social and linguistic, faced by newcomer, multilingual students. To prepare teachers for the actual writing and implementing of an ESOL program where needed, students will be exposed to current program models in the United States, Canada, Eastern Europe, Romania in particular, and Australia.

COURSE OBJECTIVES

By the end of the course, students will not only have a clearer understanding of the procedures involved in program design at the macro and micro level, but will also be able to:

Display an informed theoretical understanding of established national and international ESOL program models, and key attributes of effective program design.
Exhibit a detailed understanding of previous and current federal mandates regarding LEP students and their potential impact on program design models.
Demonstrate a critical awareness of the specific details of national TESOL standards in a bid to design and implement relevant and cohesive curricular content delivery in specific school and county-level ESOL programs.
Possess knowledge and awareness of avenues of external and internal grant sponsorship in a bid to garner funding so as to design or improve existing ESOL program models.
Generate a draft grant proposal for a uniquely designed program model for a specific rural school or county of choice.

The long-term outcome is to equip teachers with the expertise and confidence to design, implement and consistently improve rural ESOL programs for the benefit of all student learners involved in the educational process at the K-12 level and beyond.

TEXTS/MATERIALS

Required Texts:

ESL Standards for Pre-K-12 Students. (1997). Alexandria, VA.: Teachers of English to Speakers on Other Languages Inc.

Supplementary Texts:

Schecter, Sandra and Jim Cummins (2003). Multilingual Education in Practice: Using Diversity as a Resource. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Walqui, Aidi (2000). Access and Engagement: Program Design and Instructional Approaches for Immigrant Students in Secondary School. McHenry, IL: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems.

Snow, M.A. (2000). Implementing the ESL Standards for Pre-K-12 Students through Teacher Education.

Richards, Jack. (2001). Curriculum Development in Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Berube, Barney (2000). Managing ESL Programs in Rural and Small Urban Schools. Alexandria, VA: TESOL Inc.

Lucas, Tamara (1997). Into, Through and Beyond Secondary School: Critical Transitions for Immigrant Youths. McHenry, IL: Center for Applied Linguistics and Delta Systems.

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. Title 1 and Title III: Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged. National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education: George Washington University.

**** Additional readings will be distributed in class or placed on reserve at the library.

Writing across the Curriculum (WAC) Statement

All written work in this course including, but not limited to, the formal assignments, such as the written assignments, as well as the formal project, are in support of the University’s Writing across the Curriculum Program.

ACADEMIC DISHONESTY/PLAGIARISM Policy

The English Department takes plagiarism, the unacknowledged use of other people’s ideas, very seriously. As outlined in the Student Handbook under the “Policy on Student Academic Integrity,” plagiarism may receive such penalties as failure on a paper or failure in the course. The English Department recognizes that plagiarism is a very serious academic offense and professors make their decisions regarding sanctions accordingly. Since the research paper is a very important component of this class, please familiarize yourself with the details below.

Each of the following constitutes plagiarism:

1. Turning in as your own work a paper or part of a paper that anyone other than you wrote. This would include but is not limited to work taken from another student, from a published author, or from an Internet contributor.

2. Turning in a paper that includes unquoted and/or undocumented passages someone else wrote.

3. Including in a paper someone else’s original ideas, opinions or research results without attribution.

4. Paraphrasing without attribution.

A few changes in wording do not make a passage your property. As a precaution, if you are in doubt, cite the source. Moreover, if you have gone to the trouble to investigate secondary sources, you should give yourself credit for having done so by citing those sources in your essay and by providing a list of Works Cited or Works Consulted at the conclusion of the essay. In any case, failure to provide proper attribution could result in a severe penalty and is never worth the risk.

SPECIAL NEEDS: Any students with disabilities or other special needs, who need special accommodations and adjustments in this course, are invited to share these concerns or requests with the instructor as soon as possible.

ESOL/TESOL: NCATE STANDARDS[2] AND LINKAGES TO THE COURSE

Please refer to Domains 3 and 5 on pp. 40-50 and 61-68 respectively, as well as other sections relevant to program design models in the document: http://www.ncate.org/standard/new%20program%20standards/tesol.pdf.

Standard 5.b. Partnerships and Advocacy: “Candidates serve as professional resources, advocate for ESOL students, and build partnerships with students’ families” (p. 61).

Standard 5. c. Professional Development and Collaboration: “Candidates collaborate with and are prepared to serve as a resource to all staff, including paraprofessionals, to improve learning for all ESOL students.” (p. 61)

Also, please refer to the Rubric for Domain 3 under Planning, Implementing and Managing Instruction: “Candidates know, understand, and use standards-based practices and strategies related to planning, implementing, and managing ESL and content instruction, including classroom organization, teaching strategies for developing and integrating language skills, and choosing and adapting classroom resources” p. 40.

MSDE/NCATE Technology Requirements

All students seeking TESOL certification should establish an electronic portfolio, and include as many projects from this course in this portfolio. Detailed hypermedia presentations done for this course can be included in this electronic portfolio. When including your portfolio selection, be sure to include: (just some tips!)

A brief narrative argument explaining why the selection will be integrated into your classroom pedagogy—explain why it is of importance.
The extent to which the selected material meets outlined course objectives—show its connection to the actual course.
A brief synthesis of the extent to which you feel that your selection meets a specific standard in the above cited NCATE/TESOL standards and your evaluation of whether it:

a) Approaches the specific standard

b) Meets the specific standard

c) Exceeds the specific standard

Please consult the following web page: http://trc.salisbury.edu/portfolio/Portfolio.htm

Attendance Policy and class structure

You are responsible for coming to every class meeting barring any emergencies. There will be numerous in-class work assignments. Since this is a very practical course, be sure come to class rested and alert. Always come to class with your textbook and any assigned reading. The short duration of the course will require that you take careful notes throughout the duration of the course. These notes will aid in constructing and refining your draft grant proposal for an innovative ESOL program model in either your school or county under the No Child Left Behind Act. Your in-class work assignments will constitute part of the grade awarded for class participation/review. If you are absent on a day of an in-class assignment, you will receive a zero for that assignment. If the reason for the absence is valid (such as sickness or any such unforeseen circumstance), make-up work may be assigned. Otherwise, missed in-class work may not be made up. The tight schedule of this class will require you to manage your time very wisely. Professionalism, respect for your fellow peers, and dedication to learning will be expected of all members of the class, and will constitute the guiding principle of this final course. You are to view yourselves as potential program planners/coordinators for the counties and schools you represent.

REQUIREMENTS AND STRUCTURE OF THE COURSE

Item to be Evaluated	Percentage of Grade
In-class Participation and discussion	20%
Analysis of TESOL Standards	20%
Roundtable discussion: Program models:	20%
Romanian case study	20%
draft grant proposal:	20%
OUTLINING A MODEL RURAL ESOL PROGRAM: (The Total Evaluation.)	100%

DETAILED EVALUATION CRITERIA

In-class Participation and discussion: Your daily class participation will be assessed via your contributions to discussions of salient topics as well as your participation in key in-class activities.

Analysis of TESOL Standards: You will all be asked to discuss the TESOL standards using a number of systematic criteria outlined in the analysis of curricula standards by Gagne and Cameron (1998) namely, a distinction drawn between an envisioned curriculum, an enacted curriculum, and finally, an experienced curriculum (see, e.g., Scheter and Cummins 2003: 103 reproduced below for definitions).

	The Envisioned Curriculum refers to the written curriculum mandated by districts or governments/organizations (the TESOL standards in your text).
	The Enacted Curriculum to the events and activities that teachers actually plan and carry out in their classrooms (the vignettes in your textbook).
	The Experienced Curriculum refers to the ways in which children experience the subject matter they are intended to learn along with the unintentional learning that goes on (Your predictions of impact i.e., how workable are these standardized goals as evinced in these vignettes?).

Your Task: You will be divided into three groups of elementary, middle and secondary teachers (based as much as possible on your actual training/backgrounds—see the list below).

Elementary Teacher Cohort (Grades Pre-K-3 pp. 31-67):

Campbell Catessa
Lori Shockley
Ruth Young
Amy Diem

Middle School Cohort (Grades 4-8 pp. 69-105)

Nicole Catanazaro
Samirah El-baf
Heidi Decker
Jaqui Rachor

High-School Cohort (Grades 9-12 pp. 108-151)

Tammie Farraj
Renee Hesson
Cassandra Neubauer
Stefanie Riddle

Each group will consist of four members who will have to each decide to present the given standards and vignettes. Aim for as comprehensive an analysis as possible based on your expertise as teachers.

· There are 9 vignettes for each level so you will have to decide how you are going to present this among yourselves. You will be given some time during the first institute to organize this.

	Link the above three talking points on curricula to any other key information you want to synthesize from your previous ACE classes or actual teaching to these vignettes.
	Each panel will have 30 minutes (Each panel gets a total of 90 minutes to present Goals 1-3 for each grade level—a maximum of 25 minutes per person on this task). Please decide how best to organize this.
	This project stresses the importance of collaborative organization. Each member in the group will be required to present and participate. You may decide to choose a leader/organizer who will be responsible for leading the discussion/recording key points for the group or else all will work as co-facilitators.

NOTE: Please divide the work as equitably as possible, and report any concerns. Non-participation of any member in a group will result in no points assigned to the individual for this task.

Roundtable discussion: A survey of Program models: Please choose one reading of choice to be distributed during the first institute. You may get together with any other classmate who has chosen the reading or you may decide to do this independently. A maximum of 10 minutes per person will be given during the roundtable for discussion of the article. The rest of the time will be used for discussion.

	Read the article.
	Outline any key points that you can glean related to designs and procedures of innovative ESOL programs. As much as possible put these points on a handout so that your classmates can use this material to refine their draft grant proposals.

Feel free to read aloud key sections of the chapter and point out key examples using the Elmo/overhead.

Evaluate the strengths of the program model being presented using whatever criteria you want.

	Evaluate the weaknesses of the program model being presented using similar criteria used in evaluating the strengths.
	Add any other details you want.

Romanian case study: A contrastive analysis of American and Romanian Program Models. There will be an in-class activity on this. More details will be provided by the guest professor. In discussing the standards, be sure to include a discussion of the 10^th grade vignette since this will help you prepare for your discussion during institute IV.

draft grant proposal: outlining a model rural esol program:

Your draft grant proposal will be a cumulative project worked on during class meetings and will consist of four carefully sequenced stages which answer four key questions. Stage 1 is outlined below. Details on stages 2-4 will be distributed in class.

Stage 1: Question: What would an ideal school for language minority students look like? (cf. Short 2000:13)

Scenario: “Transformative educators seek to challenge existing notions of schooling rather than blindly reproduce the status quo. To confront these notions, educators must critique existing practice and envision the alternatives.”

Task: Following the model provided in the section “Promising Futures: (pp. 3-5) in your text, and using the packet on one county’s current ESOL program, outline in the form of a detailed essay your vision of an exemplary school/county for ESOL students. Your essay will be titled “An ideal school for language minority students”. Your essay should propose to create new structures, procedures and practices for attaining any of the problems you see identified in the packet concerning the education of language minority students in rural areas. Be as specific as you can as to how your plan/model will be: 1. organized, 2. designed/scheduled, and 3. implemented. Also, make sure that your plan clearly states what programmatic problem you are trying to resolve in your essay.

NOTE: The syllabus that follows is subject to changes. Both the pacing and the content will be dictated by your needs and intended outcomes for this class.

GRADING CRITERIA

GRADUATE CREDIT: Students will be assessed on all assignments using expectations of graduate school. Papers, presentations and the research project will have to include a greater range and depth of exploration, will have to demonstrate originality of ideas, and be presented in extremely professional terms (such as at national and international conferences). The following grading system will used:

GRADING SCHEME

90-100%: A

85-89%: B+

80-84%: B

75-79%: C+

70-74%: C

65-69%: D

0-64%: F

SYLLABUS

ENGL. 533: Esol Program development

Salisbury University

Course Designer: Anjali Pandey

Guest Professor: Tamara Lacatusu

Summer 2003

Phone: Office: 410-677-5387

Home: 410-572-6033

Institute 1: PROGRAM MODELS IN THE UNITED STATES: LOCAL STATISTICS AND NATIONAL MODELS

M Aug 11 Introduction to the course, syllabus and course objectives.

Part I: A Look at Rural Counties on the Eastern Shore of Maryland

Examining key statistics and predicting future trends.

Examining some key structural obstacles inhibiting ESOL student success

Outlining the elements of grant proposal writing: Exploring avenues of Funding

ESOL Charter schools: A case from Minnesota

Looking at Class size and Language Learning: The STAR Report.

Part II: Analyzing information in one rural County

Discussing the case of current elementary, middle and high school program trends in ESOL education—The case of Wicomico county

What constitutes an Effective Program Model? Some Preliminary Considerations.

Part 11I: Outlining Exemplary Schools and an Exemplary Program Model

(Pp.1-5 in ESL Standards for Pre-K-12 Students)

· Stage 1 of Draft grant proposal

Thinking Outside the Box: Writing Your Proposal:

“An Ideal School for Language Minority Students”

(See course policy sheet for description)

Part IV: Theory & Research: Key Considerations in Program Planning

Planning for Standards Panel for Institute II

Looking at Canonized Program Models in The United States: A Macro Analysis

Part V: Synthesizing Key Elements into Program Planning

Looking at key elements of school-wide policy and LEP students: A microanalysis.

Examining some key elements of The No Child Left Behind Act and other statutory precedents.

Part VI: Refining your Proposal: What else can you add?

Discussion of key elements of your draft Proposal

Institute II: INCORPORATING STANDARDS IN PROGRAM PLANNING: CURRICULAR

CONTENT IN AN AUSTRALIAN CASE AND AN AMERICAN CASE

T Aug 12 Part I: What are Standards?

Analyzing the TESOL rubric of Standards

Analyzing an Australian set of Curricular Standards

Part II: Analyzing TESOL Goal 1 (Standards 1-3)

Presentation of Elementary Teacher Panel

Presentation of Middle School Panel

Presentation of High School Panel

Part III: Analyzing TESOL Goal 2 (Standards 1-3)

Presentation of Elementary Teacher Panel

Presentation of Middle School Panel

Presentation of High School Panel

Part IV: Analyzing TESOL Goal 3 (Standards 1-3)

Presentation of Elementary Teacher Panel

Presentation of Middle School Panel

Presentation of High School Panel

Part V: Summarizing Conclusions

· Stage 2 of Draft grant proposal

What Do We Do with This in Program Planning? Refining Your Proposal

Part VI: Application: Refining your Proposal Further

Ensuring Access to Quality Educational Experiences for Language Minority Students: Conducting interviews on your experiences.

(Interview a selected individual of choice on their experiences as students in relation to the 15 standards of access (pp.159-161 in your required text). Incorporate whatever findings into your proposal

ESOL: Program Evaluation: Key considerations: A preliminary Analysis.

Institute 1II: ANALYZING PROMISING PROGRAM MODELS IN CANADA& AMERICA: ROUNDTABLE DISCUSSION ON ACTION PLANS.

W Aug. 13: Analyzing one school district’s Action Plan Model and Implementation of School-Based Action Plans

Introducing Action Research Models and Program Development

Part I: Program Model 1: A Look at Promising American Program Models. (Four Models: please choose one)

contrasts with Canada: Multilingual Practices of another Diverse Society (please choose one)

Part II: Program Model 2: Strategies for Creating an Inclusive School Climate: Developing organized School Reception Models.

Part III:Program Model 3: Strategies for Developing an Inclusive Reading Program: Community, creativity and Innovation at work.

Part IV: Program Model 4: Building School-wide Active Authorship and Language Inheritance Models.

Part V:Program Model 5: Community Responsive Models: Developing a Situated Curriculum Model vs. Service Learning Models.

Part VI:Program Model 6: Building a Reserve Capacity: Models

for Leadership in ESOL Programs

· Stage 3 of Draft grant proposal

Distribute reading for Institute IV. “Effective Teaching and Learning Contexts for Immigrant Students”.

Institute 1V: PROGRAM MODELS IN EUROPE: A CASE STUDY OF ROMANIA

TH Aug 14 Presenter: Guest Professor Dr. Tamara Lacatusu

AI. I. Cuza University, Iasi, Romania

Focus on romania: Multilingual esol program Practices

Part I: The status of English in Europe: Analyzing linguistic passports –attitudes towards multilingualness.

Part II: The Educational System in Romania: Developing Organized Professional Training Protocols: A Case Study of Training Practices/Booklets.

A Case Study of Ethnic and Rural education models of Gypsy populations

Innovative rural-urban exchange models

Part III: Analyzing EFL curricula in Romania

Part IV: A case study of a 10^th grade curriculum model (translated by Dr. Tamara Lacatusu).

Part V: Contrasting Instructional Models in Two continents: North America and Europe (in-class activity).

Part VI: Conclusion: Incorporating knowledge into your draft proposal.

· Stage 4 of Draft grant proposal

Institute V: CONCLUSION: RURAL PROGRAM PROPOSALS FOR THE 21^ST CENTURY

· Stage 5 of Draft Grant Proposal: Presentation

F Aug 15 Part I: Final Proposal for An Ideal School for Language Minority Students