TE 639 Language and
Literacy
Chula Vista Master's Degree Program
Jill Kerper Mora, Ed.D.
San Diego State University
Fall 1999
CALIFORNIA LANGUAGE ARTS & READING
CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK
ANALYSIS & PANEL PRESENTATION
"Curriculum development is demanding and time-consuming. The results of such hard work deserve to be packaged in high-quality documents that signal to users the professionalism of the curriculum development effort." (Armstrong, 1989, p. 206)
The purpose of this assignment is to establish and apply various criteria for judging the 1999 Language Arts/Reading (LAR) Curriculum Framework published by the California Department of Education. Through this process, the student-practitioner will become familiar with the contents of the Curriculum Framework, assess their thoroughness of scope and depth, practical applicability and relevance for teaching and learning with a specified student population. The student-practitioner will also experience the advantages and limitations of statewide curriculum planning efforts for implementation of standards-based instruction. The student-practitioner will also relate the content of the LAR Framework to a language arts/reading curriculum or program currently being implemented in his/her school district.
General procedures for completing this assignment are as follows:
Step 1: The student-practitioner will choose a section of the Language Arts/Reading Framework based on his/her area of expertise and interests.
Step 2: Student-practitioners will work in class in expert groups on a selected section or focus of analysis of the document. The group will analyze the Framework collaboratively and prepare a panel discussion of the philosophy of curriculum development, knowledge base, structure, content, and assessment plan outlined in the state framework document.
Step 3: As an expert group, student-practitioners will compare and contrast the criteria for the LAR Framework to a specific language arts/reading program. Students will determine the degree of congruence between the two and/or gaps in coverage, inconsistencies, compensatory strengths and overall degree of match between the instructional program and the LAR document's recommendations and requirements.
Step 4: The student-practitioner will complete an individual written summary report of their analysis of the California LAR Framework according to the model and guidelines outlined by the professor.
The criteria for the analysis of the LAR Framework are as follows:
THE LEGITIMACY OF THE DOCUMENT
- Is the document based on current research and "state-of-the-art" thinking about the discipline and about how students learn? What are some of the studies or theoretical documents cited in the document? Are the research sources cited balanced or one-sided?
- To what degree will the potential users of the document believe that the prescribed program has some authority behind it? Who are the document developers and what is the level of credibility of the developers for the various constituencies that will likely use the document such as school boards, administrators, classroom teachers?
- If the document advocates curriculum changes that are controversial, what evidence is there that there was participation from diverse interest groups in the content and design?
PHILOSOPHY OF LITERACY AND LANGUAGE CURRICULUM & INSTRUCTION
- What definition(s) of literacy does the document reflect? Is there a clearly articulated statement of the philosophy that underlies the Framework's development, or must this be inferred by piecing together components of the document? If terms such as "balanced approach" are used throughout the document, how are these defined?
- What is the nature and structure of knowledge in this discipline that is advocated or proposed? Does this structure of knowledge represent a deviation from traditional views and practices in this discipline? Or is the document a return to traditional views of language arts/reading? If so, how is "tradition" portrayed as positive and/or negative and what rationale is given for the proposed changes?
- Who are the intended learners and what needs and characteristics of the learner are targeted with the proposed curriculum design and recommendations for instruction? Does the document address issues of cultural and linguistic diversity? English language proficiency? Bilingualism and biliteracy?
Below is a series of questions to discern the underlying philosophy of first and second language curricula and programs:
1. Can the program be identified with a particular body of theory? If so, what elements of this body of theory do you see being implemented as a component of the program? Do you believe the program is a "faithful" interpretation of the theory?
2. What assumptions are made in the program about how language is best taught to children? How is it best learned by children? At what age or stage of cognitive development?
3. If the program is a bilingual or L2 program, what assumptions are made in the program about how long it takes children to acquire a second language? What degree of proficiency are students expected to attain? For what purposes?
4. Does the language program reflect the values and beliefs of the school community? Does it reflect patterns of language use within the community? Does it seek to involve parents and families in activities to support and promote language development in the home?
5. Within the language development program, how is language used by teachers in the classroom? How is the language used by students? What types of interactions are encouraged between teacher and students and/or among the students? How are these interactions structured?
6. Is the focus of the language program on oral language or on literacy development or both? What is the balance between these forms of language use? If the focus is on language in literacy, what types of instructional materials are provided to support and enhance this type of language learning?
7. What challenges, problems, and issues surround the language program implemented at the district, school and/or classroom level? Are these academic issues, program continuity issues, and/or political issues, or other type of issue?
CLARITY OF FORMAT, ORGANIZATION AND SCOPE
Examine the table of contents, the document layout and the organization of content to determine the following:
- Is the relationship between and among the various components of the document clear and logical? Is there a notation system or coding system that will allow users to add detail and set objectives for instruction based on the document?
- Is each component of the document "completely worked out" in that a fairly uniform amount of detail and support is given for each section? Are there critiques of the document from literacy organizations available and if so, do their criticisms coincide with your group's assessment of the document?
- Does the document have a wide range of content that could be converted into a scope and sequence by a curriculum committee at the district or school level? How helpful would the document be in planning for a classroom teacher?
FEASIBILITY OF IMPLEMENTATION & PROGRAM CONGRUENCE
Examine the LAR Framework in light of your own practical experience as a classroom teacher to judge the feasibility of implementing the proposed curriculum.
- Does the Framework propose changes in the structure or organization of classrooms, groupings within classrooms, scheduling of classes, etc. in order to achieve its objectives? If so, are these changes possible and/or necessary in your school and district in order to fully implement the LAR Framework? What would be the obstacles versus the potential benefits if changes in school structure were implemented? How persuasively are these issues addressed in Framework?
- What model(s) of integration of the language arts skills (listening, speaking, reading, writing) are advocated? Or does the document emphasize each of these equally? If a skill does not receive adequate treatment, how is this area addressed in your school's language arts program? To what extent are these skills already being integrated in your school context? What changes in attitude, working style or administrative structure would be required to implement the level of integration advocated in the Framework to a greater extent in your situation?
- Are there resources and support materials for the types of instruction recommended in the LAR Framework available to implement the curriculum in your school and district? These include material resources such as textbooks at appropriate reading levels, library books, technology; and also personnel resources such as instructional assistants, qualified faculty, planning time and support? Would retraining of teachers be required to implement the LAR Framework curriculum?
PLAN FOR ASSESSMENT AND EVALUATION
Examine the assessment plan proposed for the evaluation of the curriculum outcomes.
- What procedures or process for evaluating the reading/language arts curriculum are recommended? How detailed a plan is outlined? Does the plan include assessment of student outcomes as well as a means of evaluating and revising the overall curriculum plan and implementation?
- Is the plan realistic in terms of availability and limitations on time, resources and staff? Does the plan appear to give true accountability leading to real improvements in student learning and the reading/language arts curriculum process overall?
- Are the results of assessment such that they can be explained in understandable terms to parents, interest groups, and the public at large? Would the parents and public have to be "re-educated" in order to understand and accept the results of the assessment?
PROFESSIONAL REACTION TO THE FRAMEWORK
In addressing this area of analysis, think of specific examples of values, beliefs and concepts contained in the Framework that are congruent or incongruent with your current philosophy, knowledge base and practices.
- To what extent is the philosophy expounded by the LAR Framework congruent with your own?
- Has the document persuaded you to try some new approach or strategy? What results might you hope to achieve by incorporating these changes into your curriculum and instruction?
- Has the review and critique of the LAR Framework contributed to your knowledge of language and literacy instruction? In what specific areas?
- What recommendations regarding your district's and/or school's language and literacy curriculum or program(s) would you make to administrators based on your analysis and panel presentation of the LAR Framework?
GROUP WORK & PANEL PREPARATION
You will have time in class during three sessions to work as a group to prepare your panel presentation of the LAR Framework. The first meeting of your subject area group you will plan your work as a team using your own agreed-upon format. There are five areas of analysis that will be covered by the panel. The sixth area is the professional reaction that will be reported in the individual written report from each student-practitioner. Consequently, you may wish to divide up the responsibility for reporting on each area or have designated pairs of students to cover one or two related areas or sub-topics within an area. Oral presentations should be limited to one-half hour for your group.
The following are the criteria for assessing the panel presentation:
- The panel made the LAR Framework accessible to a "non-expert" in the subject area.
- The panel covered the major areas of analysis relevant to the project & their particular LAR Framework section or focus.
- The panel showed the results of teamwork and cooperation in analysis and preparation of their section or focus for the LAR Framework.
- The panel made the LAR Framework interesting and relevant to classmates as educators.
A suggested format for your Panel Presentation follows:
I. Statement of Purpose
This section of your panel presentation will include a statement of your purpose in undertaking a correlation analysis between the LAR Framework/Content Standards and your school district's literacy curriculum. Address such questions as: What did you believe you could discover about the Standards document and the curriculum before you began the analysis? What was your impression of the curriculum's level of congruence with the Standards beforehand? What were the sources of these beliefs about the curriculum? Were these confirmed or denied in your analysis?
II. Units of Analysis
This section of your presentation to the class provides a snapshot of how you decided to divide up the work for your analysis. What process did you use? Were the criteria based on group members' areas of expertise? The structure of the LAR Standards? The structure of the curriculum? Do you believe that this process yielded a thorough coverage of the important components of your literacy instruction program?
III. Presentation of Findings
During this portion of the panel presentation you will display and explain your LAR Standards and curriculum analysis work product. What was the overall level of congruence between the two for your grade level or subject area? What specific areas of the LAR standards are not thoroughly enough covered or addressed in the curriculum? From a practicing teachers' standpoint, what are the implications of any lack of congruency that you have discovered? What resources, materials, instructional support services, etc. would be needed to address areas of weakness?
IV. Conclusions
This section includes an overview of what you have learned about literacy curriculum philosophy and design from the analysis process and the value and utility of your work product. Address such questions as these: How well do the Standards and/or your curriculum match the needs and abilities of your particular student population? To what extent do they provide a guidance and structure for planning and implementing literacy instruction in your classrooms? Were these absent from your literacy program before the LAR standards became available or before beginning implementation of your literacy program? In your view, are there too much structure and/or too many requirements that can feasibly be met within the framework of your literacy program?
INDIVIDUAL CURRICULUM FRAMEWORK REPORT
The purpose of the individual report following the group work and panel presentation is for the student-practitioner to synthesize and evaluate the knowledge and expertise gained during the group process. The student-practitioner will demonstrate the ability to relate this new knowledge and perspective on the California Language Arts/Reading Framework to his/her own educational, professional and/or school context.
The report should be from three to five type-written pages in length, with a summary discussion of each of the five areas outlined above, focusing on the questions posed in Area 6-Professional Reaction to the Framework. You may choose your model of discussion to weave your comments within the summaries of the five areas or to include your reactions in a separate section. Be sure to cover each area in a balanced manner.
AREAS OF ANALYSIS OF 1999 LANGUAGE ARTS & READING FRAMEWORK
Introduction to the Framework; Goals and Key Components of Effective Language Arts Instruction
- Content Standards and Instructional Practices, K-3
- Content Standards and Instructional Practices, 4-8
- Content Standards and Instructional Practices, 9-12
- Assessment of Proficiency in the Language Arts
- Universal Access to the Language Arts Curriculum
- Responsibilities and Support for Proficiency in the Language Arts
- Development and Evaluation of Instructional Materials
To Navigate Dr. Mora's CLAD Website:
This page was last updated on 10/26/99