Overlapping Strategies TO MEET THE LANGUAGE, LEARNING, AND LITERACY NEEDS OF A DIVERSE STUDENT POPULATION Linda Champney University of Colorado at Denver linda_champney@ultrasys.net Dr. Nancy Shanklin University of Colorado at Denver Nancy.Shanklin@cudenver.edu

Content Literacy Pyramid MEETING THE LANGUAGE, LEARNING, AND LITERACY NEEDS OF A DIVERSE STUDENT POPULATION Linda Champney University of Colorado at Denver linda_champney@ultrasys.net Dr. Nancy Shanklin University of Colorado at Denver Nancy.Shanklin@cudenver.edu

The Learning, Language, & Literacy Special Populations in Public Schools in the United States Students with Learning Disabilities. The national statistics from the U.S. Department of Education from 2002-2003 report that 6,449,904 or 13.4% (National Center for Education Statistics, 2004) of public school children are served under the Individuals With Disabilities Act. Students with Limited English Proficiency. 42% of all public school teachers in 2002 have at least one limited English proficient student in their classes and only 30% of those teachers have received any training in how to teach those students (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2003). Struggling Readers. The National Assessment of Educational Progress cites 69% of 4th graders, 69% of 8th graders and 66% of 12th graders were below the proficient level in reading in 2002. Only 5% of the 12th graders could elaborate or extend the ideas they were reading about (U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2002).

SYSTEMIC CHANGE FRAMEWORK Focus of Content Literacy Pyramid Research Ferguson, D. L., Kozleski, E. B., Smith, A. (2003).  Transformed, Inclusive Schools:  A Framework to Guide Fundamental Change in Urban Schools.  Effective Education for Learners with Exceptionalities, 15, Elsevieer Science, pp. 43-74.

CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID PRIOR KNOWLEDGE ELABORATION ENGAGEMENT METACOGNITION VOCABULARY ORGANIZERS CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID STRUGGLING READERS STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES STUDENT S WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS CONTENT LITERACY: READING, WRITING, SPEAKING, LISTENING, VIEWING TO LEARN CONTENT

Recommendations for General Education Students in Content Classrooms The Learner-Centered Principles Work Group of the American Psychological Association Board of Educational Affairs (1997) generated the following list of principles of effective instruction for all students: Learning needs to be an intentional process of constructing meaning Goals must be personally relevant to the student Learner must be able to connect new knowledge to prior knowledge in meaningful ways Learner exercises control over his/her thinking by creating and using strategies where appropriate Learner uses metacognitive strategies Instructional practices and the classroom environment must be appropriate for the learners Motivation to learn is influenced by the student’s background and prior experiences with learning and must be taken into consideration Intrinsic motivation to learn is enhanced when students are interested in the subject under discussion, are given a degree of personal choice and control, and are able to see the relevance of what they are learning to real life Unless students are motivated, they will not learn. They need a purpose for learning Individuals learn best when material is appropriate to their developmental level and is presented in an enjoyable and interesting way Learning can be enhanced when the learner has an opportunity to interact and to collaborate with others on instructional tasks Educators need to help students examine their learning preferences and expand or modify them, if necessary When learners perceive that their individual differences in abilities, backgrounds, cultures, and experiences are valued, respected, and accommodated in learning tasks and contexts, levels of motivation and achievement are enhanced Assessment provides important information to both the learner and teacher at all stages of the learning process

CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID PRIOR KNOWLEDGE ELABORATION ENGAGEMENT METACOGNITION VOCABULARY ORGANIZERS CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID STRUGGLING READERS STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES STUDENT S WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS CONTENT LITERACY: READING, WRITING, SPEAKING, LISTENING, VIEWING TO LEARN CONTENT The Content Literacy Pyramid is to teachers who are planning content lessons as the USDA food pyramid is to moms who are choosing foods to sustain an active, healthy family. *Whether choosing to eat an apple as part of the fruits and vegetable category of the food pyramid or completing an anticipation guide as part of the prior knowledge category of the Content Literacy Pyramid, the participant is moving toward the goal. *Not all parts need to be consumed every day, but all parts need to be addressed over the long run in order to reach the goal.

CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID PRIOR KNOWLEDGE ELABORATION ENGAGEMENT METACOGNITION VOCABULARY ORGANIZERS CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID STRUGGLING READERS STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES STUDENT S WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS CONTENT LITERACY: READING, WRITING, SPEAKING, LISTENING, VIEWING TO LEARN CONTENT

CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID STUDENT S WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY ACCESSING PREVIOUS LEARNING CREATING KWL CHARTS QUESTIONING USING PICTURES LISTENING TO NARRATIVES PREREADING PREDICTING STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS STRUGGLING READERS PRIOR KNOWLEDGE CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID CONTENT LITERACY: READING, WRITING, SPEAKING, LISTENING, VIEWING TO LEARN CONTENT

CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID LEARNING BY INQUIRY GIVING PRAISE & RECOGNITION GIVING STUDENT CHOICES ACCESSING BACKGROUND & EXPERIENCES CONSIDERING STUDENT INTERESTS PROVIDING LEVELED TEXTS USING CONCEPT-ORIENTED READING INSTRUCTION (CORI) STUDENT S WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS STRUGGLING READERS ENGAGEMENT CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID CONTENT LITERACY: READING, WRITING, SPEAKING, LISTENING, VIEWING TO LEARN CONTENT

CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID THINKING ALOUD SELF-MONITORING OF UNKNOWN WORDS & COMPREHENSION USING JOURNALS / LEARNING LOGS REFLECTING / SHARING STUDENT S WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS STRUGGLING READERS METACOGNITION CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID CONTENT LITERACY: READING, WRITING, SPEAKING, LISTENING, VIEWING TO LEARN CONTENT

CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID CONNECTING COGNATES CLARIFYING NOTING WORD STRUCTURE CREATING MNEMONICS (Using Pictures & Story Cues) USING CONTEXT CLUES RECOGNIZING EMBEDDED MEANINGS STUDENT S WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES VOCABULARY GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS STRUGGLING READERS CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID CONTENT LITERACY: READING, WRITING, SPEAKING, LISTENING, VIEWING TO LEARN CONTENT

CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID STUDENT S WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES ORGANIZERS GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS STRUGGLING READERS CREATING GRAPHIC ORGANIZERS STORY MAPPING WEBBING/MAPPING OUTLINING MAKING VENN DIAGRAMS SKETCHING CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID CONTENT LITERACY: READING, WRITING, SPEAKING, LISTENING, VIEWING TO LEARN CONTENT

CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID STUDENT S WITH LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY ELABORATION STUDENTS WITH LEARNING DISABILITIES SUMMARIZING USING ELABORATIVE INTERROGATION DRAMATIZING VISUALIZING DEMONSTRATING LEARNING COOPERATIVELY IMPLEMENTING RECIPROCAL TEACHING ETC. GENERAL EDUCATION STUDENTS STRUGGLING READERS CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID CONTENT LITERACY: READING, WRITING, SPEAKING, LISTENING, VIEWING TO LEARN CONTENT

*NOT USING CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID

**UTILIZING CONTENT LITERACY PYRAMID

STUDENT RESPONSES TO TWO LESSON PLANS Subject: Prompt Compare the two lesson plans (attached and at bottom of Lesson 10) on LETTERS FROM RIFKA and note the differences between “covering the subject” and teaching the students. List your observations and reflect on what that might look like in your subject area. Posted by Student #10 on Tuesday, March 29, 2005 11:52 Subject: Student #10 The first example brought back memories of when I was in the public schools. Back then, the majority of teachers taught by telling without any strategy other than reading and memorizing. It is obvious how a class of middle school students would not feel involved in the task or the reading material. When the teacher uses chapter questions as the anticipation strategy, it is clear that the students are not likely to feel connected to the text. The teacher brought nothing interesting or unique to the objectives of the lesson. Also, the teacher did nothing to invite the students to be part of the lesson and contribute to discussions. I think trying to get students more connected to reading tasks is a challenge, but by presenting strategies that get the students excited and more anxious to be involved is always necessary to overcome that challenge. The second example was much more complete and teacher-guided. The teacher made efforts to get the students excited about the story. It was a good idea to ask the students of their own personal experiences to encourage active participation and anticipation for the reading task. It's reasonable to assume that more students will respond to a lesson plan that offers more variety in strategy and structure, and asks more from the students' than just reading and textual regurgitation. In Social Studies, the style of teaching is crucial if there is to be any connection to text or task. When the teacher is simply presenting historical "facts" and events, there is little connection to the lesson, the material, or the objectives. When a Social Studies teacher encourages others to contribute to the discourse, the class is far more interesting and effective. The Social Studies teacher needs to have lesson plans and supporting strategies that are make history relevant to the student. This relevance is difficult to achieve when teaching a class by the book, with no or little participation required. Posted by Student #6 on Sunday, April 3, 2005 21:10 Subject: Lesson Plans The first lesson is not very involved and comes across as being boring. The first teacher can certainly say that she covered the subject but that is about all she did. The students were not engaged in the first lesson. The second lesson is a much more detailed lesson that is truly teaching the students. The students are exposed to a multi-subject lesson that integrates language arts, history, geography and cooperative learning. As a social studies teacher the second lesson plan could certainly be used within my class, I truly enjoyed the detail of the second lesson plan. I also thought the second lesson plan had elements that would benefit all students even ESL or special education students.