ncate Institutional Report
banner  
 

 

logo

 

Additional Evidence Report for Elementary Education (MAT)

This report is designed to include additional information not already included in SPA reports. Begin your program review with the latter.

FIELD EXPERIENCES

Field and clinical experiences comprise a significant and critical component of the program. Candidates have field experiences during all aspects of the program, including during the beginning courses, the methods courses, and finally the full semester student teaching.

During the beginning courses candidates conduct classroom observations, tutor in urban classrooms, and teach small group afterschool programs, thus providing opportunities for candidates to apply instructional models, strategies, and techniques learned in the courses. In ELED 500 Reflections: The Art and Science of Teaching, teacher candidates conduct classroom observations and teach small groups of children in afterschool programs, thus providing opportunities for candidates to apply instructional models, strategies, and techniques learned in this course. The candidates are required to conduct at two one-hour classroom observations in different school districts and grade levels. The Afterschool Program places candidates in the schools for seven weeks. They begin with an orientation, then plan and implement a six-lesson program organized around something in the arts, physical education, or health area, with the last meeting including a learning celebration with students presenting what they've learned to their families. In FNED 546 Contexts of Schooling, teacher candidates spend 15 hours tutoring in an urban school setting to have an opportunity to explore first-hand the impact of socio-cultural forces, school expectations, and institutional arrangements on students. They visit the same classroom roughly ten times, once a week, for 1.5 hours each visit over a period of two to three months in a school with a predominantly low-income, racially diverse student population. During this experience they interact with students in the classroom, collect demographic information about the school, attend a school committee, school improvement team, or equivalent meeting, and interview the host teacher.

During the next part of their programs, candidates take six methods courses and a course instructing them in universal design for teaching all students. Each methods course is offered with or without a field experience component. Candidates are required to take a minimum of three methods courses with an associated field experience component, but may opt to take as many beyond that as is feasible in their plans of study. They teach lessons and units in the associated discipline in a variety of elementary classrooms under the guidance of the cooperating classroom teacher and course instructor. What is essential to note here is that during these experiences, the course instructor is present and confers with the cooperating classroom teacher to discuss progress of each candidate, thus providing ongoing feedback designed to improve teacher candidate knowledge and skills. The amount of time in the field varies between courses, but ranges from more than a third to fifty percent of course time. In ELED 538 Mathematics MAT Practicum - candidates construct, teach, and reflect on a unit of instruction over the course of 10 course sessions in an urban ring school; this represents more than a third of the course and involves extensive work with both instructor and cooperating teachers providing ongoing feedback about candidates' implementation of lessons and assessments of student learning. In ELED 537 Science MAT Practicum - candidates teach a unit of instruction using NSF endorsed science kits. Teacher candidates work in teams of two or three to plan the science unit, teach eight lessons, and reflect on teaching and learning science. About a third of the course (10 of 28 classes) is devoted to the practical teaching. In ELED 524 Developmental Reading II MAT Practicum - candidates look at the ways teachers diagnose and enhance students' reading abilities. The candidates work with small groups of students as they assess reading levels and abilities and must follow up with a discussion (via essay) of their next steps. Candidates have approximately 12 practicum experiences during this course, which represents approximately 43% of course time.

The final phase of the program involves a full semester (14 weeks) student teaching (ELED 539) in an elementary classroom and an associated two semester hour seminar. Candidates are expected to assume total responsibility for the instructional program as soon as possible as determined by the cooperating teacher, college supervisor, and candidate, but are required to do so for a period of no less than four full weeks. One measure candidates use to demonstrate competence during this experience is by completion of a Teacher Candidate Work Sample (TCWS). There is an associated two semester hour seminar (ELED 569).

All candidates work in urban and urban core settings during phase I of their programs when they are in the FNED 546 Contexts of Schooling and ELED 500 Reflections: The Art and Science of Teaching courses. They work in an urban core setting during ELED 538 Mathematics MAT Practicum and a rural setting during ELED 537 Science MAT Practicum. During ELED 524 Developmental Reading: MAT Practicum II, candidates have experiences in an urban setting. Finally, during student teaching, most candidates are placed in an urban setting, with some placed in a suburban setting. The limited number of sections in the introductory and methods courses allows control over placements, thus ensuring candidates have experiences in a range of settings.

Faculty who teach the program courses determine field placements and are responsible for selecting and preparing cooperating teachers. Faculty work very closely with the cooperating teachers as faculty are in the field with the candidates and consult with the cooperating teachers during and after lessons are taught. These relationships are ongoing and have been in place for many years, contributing to very clear communication about expectations of candidates and any changes in requirements that occur.

CONSISTENCY OF ASSESSMENT DECISIONS

The Elementary Education MAT program involves three distinct assessment points: Admission; Preparing To Teach; and Exit:

At Admission, the MAT Committee reviews applications together during regular meetings and makes decisions to admit based on the criteria for admission. The criteria are clear, and in cases where a candidate does not meet a specific criterion, discussion is held weighing other factors in the application. In those cases the Committee votes on whether or not to make an exception. Exceptions are not made on standardized test scores; those must be met. In most instances where an exception is made it is with respect to the undergraduate GPA not quite meeting the 3.0 minimum.

During their program coursework, candidates complete artifacts that are assessed by the course instructors using rubrics. These become part of their Preparing To Teach portfolio, which is reviewed by MAT Committee members before the candidates are allowed to student teach. At this point, candidates have compiled products that taken together demonstrate their overall competence in teaching according to guiding standards, including the RIPTS, Conceptual Framework, and ACEI/SPA Standards. In addition, candidates are assessed through multiple means in each program course, as determined by the course instructor. The course instructor evaluates the candidate's progress in the respective course, and if the candidate is not progressing adequately, the instructor will notify the ELED Department Retention Committee and the MAT Committee to address the issue. In these situations, a candidate may be required to meet with the MAT Committee to determine corrective action or be counseled out of the program.

The final phase of the program includes the full semester of student teaching and an associated seminar. Candidates complete a comprehensive Teacher Candidate Work Sample (TCWS) that is assessed by the cooperating teacher. Meetings were held with the FSEHD Director of Assessment to facilitate consistency in scoring this assessment. Candidates are also observed three times by both their Cooperating Teacher and College Supervisor who complete a Teacher Candidate Observation and Progress Report (TCOPR) to assess their progress.

Assessment Procedure Chart


Key assessments

Procedures for maintaining consistent assessment decisions

  • PRAXIS II Exams: Content and Essay

See www.ets.org for specific details.

2.  English Content Portfolio

The work that teacher candidates submit in their English Content Portfolio is evaluated by a committee of English faculty. The composition of this scoring committee changes each semester, and prior to each semester's scoring session, members of the committee are trained to use the rubric (see attached), by the English Department Chair, in a practice scoring session.
Once readers are trained and begin the work of reading and scoring the portfolios, each portfolio score is arrived at using this process: Two readers independently read and score the contents of each portfolio using the rubric below. They then compare their scores and, if they disagree on the assessment (for instance, if one reader scores a portfolio a “satisfactory” and another an “outstanding”), a third reader is asked to review the portfolio and to score it, and then an average score is reached from those three readings.

3.  Teacher Candidate Work Sample (TCWS): Contextual Factors, Learning Goals, Assessment Plan, Design for Instruction

Assessed by the Student Teaching Seminar Instructor. See below for details.

4.  Teacher Candidate Observation and Progress Report

Assessed by the Student Teaching Seminar Instructor. See below.

5. TCWS: Instructional Decision-making, Analysis of Student Learning, Candidate Reflection

Assessed by the Student Teaching Seminar Instructor. See below.

6.  Critical Analysis of Media Lesson Plan

Assessed by the Student Teaching Seminar Instructor. See below.

Summary/Narrative
During the summer of 2008, the FSEHD Assessment Committee (of which Dr. Johnson is a member) designed a Teacher Candidate Work Sample (TCWS) adapted from the Renaissance Partnership for Improving Teacher Quality Project.The English Education program was one of two programs to pilot the TCWS in fall 2008, and one of several in spring 2009.As a result of feedback from the pilot cohorts throughout the FSEHD, the Assessment Committee completed a thorough revision in summer 2009. The revision included clarifications of directions and samples; adding a writing usage section to each rubric; more rigorous requirements; and a new section called the Candidate Reflection. The Student Teaching Seminar Instructors faculty in the English Education program--teach and assess all of the components of the TCWS. In addition, the FSEHD Assessment Committee developed the Observation and Progress Report (OPR) modeled on other Observation Reports in use throughout the country and with feedback from the FSEHD faculty. As with the TCWS, the English Education faculty volunteered to pilot the OPR and have used it since Spring 2009.
Teacher Candidate Work Sample Data (#3 and #5 above)
We have separated data into two tables to differentiate the two semester pilot cohorts from the two most recent semesters of implementation, including the changes in points for each product.


Pilot Cohorts

Contextual Factors
(30 pts)

Learning Goals
(24 pts)

Assessment Plan
(30 pts)

Design for Instruction
(42 pts)

Fall 2008
(7 students)

27.5

23.4

25.4

36.7

Spring 2009
(11 students)

23.9

20

21.6

33.2

Cohort

Contextual Factors
(36 pts)

Learning Goals
(42 pts)

Assessment Plan
(48 pts)

Design for Instruction
(42 pts)

Fall 2009
(7 students)

31.4

35

42.1

34.7

Spring 2010
(15 students)

29.5

34.5

41.2

32.2

Pilot Cohorts

Instructional Decision Making
(18 points)

Analysis of Student Learning (24 points)

Candidate Reflection (not administered)

Fall 2008
(7 students)

17

20.1

N/A

Spring 2009
(11 students)

14.7

18.2

N/A

       
       
       

Cohort

Instructional Decision Making
(42 points)

Analysis of Student Learning (42 points)

Candidate Reflection (30 points)

Fall 2009
(7 students)

34.7

35.8

24.6

Spring 2010
(15 students)

36.6

35

25.2

After the TCWS was in use for two years, English Education program faculty analyzed data from all four cohorts (Fall 2008, Spring 2009, Fall 2009, Spring 2010). The two second cohorts provided the more useful and reliable information, as the pilots were the first time English Education faculty had taught and assessed the TCWS, and the candidates were unfamiliar with some of the terminology used within it. Across the four cohorts, candidate performance remained steady for the Contextual Factors, Learning Goals (with the exception of the first pilot cohort), and Design for Instruction products, and improved most dramatically with the Assessment Plan (+4% from fall 2008 to fall 2009 and +14% from spring 2009 to spring 2010).Data from the pilot cohorts indicated that candidates were not well-prepared to develop assessments, so efforts were made to focus more heavily on assessment throughout the Secondary Education Program.English Education faculty devoted significantly more time in Practicum and Student Teaching Seminar to teaching candidates how to design and implement appropriate pre-, formative, and summative assessments, and the higher scores indicate these efforts paid off.
Observation and Progress Report Data (#4 above)
For the sake of clarity and brevity, data is included from the third (last) formal observation from both college teachers and cooperating teachers for the OPR.Faculty believe this is an appropriate measurement of student teaching because it occurs after 12-14 weeks in the placement.


Section One: Lesson Indicators

Fall 2009
College Teacher
(Obs. 3)

Fall 2009
Cooperating Teacher
(Obs. 3)

Spring 2010
College Teacher
(Obs. 3)

Spring 2010
Cooperating Teacher
(Obs. 3)

Planning

5.5

5.27

4.79

4.8

Action: Implementation

5.3

5.11

4.70

4.91

Action:
Content

5.48

5.17

4.96

5.28

Action: Climate

5.5

5.32

4.94

5.33

Action: Class Management

5.35

5.26

4.84

4.93

Section Two:
Capsule Rating

5.85

6

5

5.16

Section Three:
Post Observation
Reflection

5.74

5.57

5.06

5.31

Section Four: Ongoing Progress (only teachers assess)
Professional Behavior

N/A

5.75

N/A

5.65

Technology

N/A

4.99

N/A

4.96

The Observation and Progress Report was first implemented as a pilot in spring 2009, but there was not enough data to analyze so it is not included here. For Fall 2009 and Spring 2010, the data is somewhat inconsistent for the following reasons.First, the Unit (FSEHD) is still perfecting an online database for both college supervisors and cooperating teachers to input their data.Not all teachers were accustomed to the system, and thus there is some missing data from them.Second, English Education faculty are still familiarizing themselves with the instrument and calibrating their scores in order to achieve inter-rater reliability.Third, the instrument is a living document, and the Assessment Committee is still perfecting it, which may account for some differences in scores between semesters.Fourth, there is a large difference in student numbers between cohorts (seven in Fall 2009 versus 16 in Spring 2010).For the smaller cohort, extremely high or low numbers skew the data.
That being said, the data do offer significant feedback about the English Education program:

  • Teacher candidates' scores are in the Acceptable (3-4) and Target (5-6) ranges for each section, according to the scoring rubrics for the Observation Report. This is evidence of how well candidates perform in their professional placements and how well college teachers and cooperating teachers model and mentor the candidates.
  • The data indicate that inter-rater reliability exists between college supervisors and cooperating teachers within each cohort.This consistency is important, as it indicates that candidates are receiving similar messages about their strengths and weaknesses.
  • While inter-rater reliability exists within cohorts, it does not exist across cohorts.The Fall 2009 cohort, supervised by Dr. Jennifer Cook, and the Spring 2010 cohort, supervised by Dr. Janet Johnson, indicate that Dr. Johnson and her cooperating teachers score candidates consistently lower. There are multiple factors that could be contributing to this gap, including the variation in size of the cohorts, but work is needed to ensure that their interpretations of the instrument are in alignment.
  • The disaggregated data does not indicate any obvious outliers, which is a sign that the instrument is effective in capturing both supervisors' and teachers' assessments of the candidates.

To summarize: data analysis of the Teacher Candidate Work Sample and Observation and Progress Report scores indicates that the English Education faculty grade consistently within their cohorts. However, Dr. Johnson scores her candidates lower than Dr. Cook on the TCWS and OPR.There are various factors that might contribute to this gap, and thus further analysis is needed.In the coming semesters, Dr. Johnson and Dr. Cook will work together to develop inter-rater reliability by scoring each other's candidates on these assessments and comparing notes.
Critical Analysis of Media Lesson Plan (#6 above)
In compiling the data for this report, it is clear that there are significant deficiencies in this assessment.Richer indicators for each measure of the assessment (the 1-4 rating scale) need to be developed. While this data provides general information about consistent weaknesses of candidates in the production of lessons that allow for students to critically analyze media, it does not provide sufficient information to develop a more accurate or better measure of their knowledge in this area. English Education faculty need to work on developing a more effective assessment of candidates' knowledge of non-print texts/media and their applications, interpretations, and analyses.
Key to scores:
1=the skill is not significantly present
2=the skill is evident, but is vague or not appropriately developed
3=the skill is evident, but does not fully meet all criteria in the indicator
4=the skill is evident and addresses all criteria in the indicator

 

Fall 2008
Mean Score

Spring 2009
Mean Score

Fall 2009
Mean Score

Spring 2010
Mean Score

1. Understands the purposes and characteristics of different kinds of curricula and related teaching resources and selected or creates instructional materials that are consistent with what is currently known about student learning in ELA (NCTE 4.1)

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

2. Engages students in critical analysis of different media and communications technologies and their effect on students' learning (NCTE 4.6)

 

2

 

3

3

 

2

 

3

 

2

10. Helps students compose and respond to film, video, graphic, photographic, audio, and multimedia texts and uses current technology to enhance their own learning and reflection on their learning (NCTE 3.6.3).

 

3

 

3

 

3

 

3

Given the shortcomings of this assessment tool, the data above still indicate some useful findings. Candidates are consistently weak in demonstrating specific NCTE indicators:

  • Demonstrates a variety of ways to teach students composing processes that result in their creating various forms of oral, visual, and written literacy (NCTE 3.2.3)
  • Uses a variety of ways to assist students in creating and critiquing a wide range of print and non-print texts for multiple purposes and helps students understand the relationships between symbols and meaning (NCTE 3.2.5)
  • Uses a variety of approaches for teaching students how to construct meaning from media and non-print texts and integrates learning opportunities into classroom experiences that promote composing and responding to such texts (NCTE 3.6.2)

The words “variety” and “various” appear several times in the above rubric:

  • a variety of ways to teach composing processes,
  • students creating various forms of literacy,
  • a variety of ways to assist students in creating and critiquing,
  • a variety of approaches, and so on.

Candidates' shortfalls in these areas seem to point to a lack of variety in their approaches to the Critical Analysis of Media assignment and in their teaching ideas and methods.One way to provide candidates with additional experiences in creating other assignments that meet these criteria is to require similar lessons from candidates in Methods courses (SED 406 and SED 407) as well as in their film cognate in the English Department (ENGL 116). This would not only provide candidates with some scaffolding for this assessment but would also allow them to, perhaps, develop a deeper repertoire where their knowledge of a variety of approaches/methods is concerned. This assessment challenge will be taken up in spring 2011 with help from the English Education Advisory Committee.

DIVERSITY

Diversity is one of the four themes in the FSEHD Conceptual Framework, and as such, is a focus throughout the ELED MAT program. Every course includes attention to diversity and addressing the learning needs of all students, including students from different racial and ethnic minority groups, English Language Learners, students with disabilities, and economically disadvantaged students. Candidates learn about strategies and techniques for promoting learning of all students, construct and teach lessons that include modifications and accommodations to address learning needs of individuals, and are involved in many field experiences that provide them with access to a wide range of children with diverse needs. Some program courses are more heavily weighted in instructing candidates about diversity in schools and how to address learning needs, including CEP 552 Psychological Perspectives on Learning and Teaching, where Response To Intervention (RTI) in a major focus. Also, FNED 546 Contexts of Schooling requires candidates to read extensively about experiences of children who represent different racial and ethnic minority groups. They participate in a service learning project in an urban setting, the purpose of which is to give candidates the opportunity to explore first-hand the impact of socio-cultural forces, school expectations, and institutional arrangements on students. SPED 531 Universal Design for Educating All Students provides a foundation for understanding and instructing children and youth with disabilities, and candidates are required to develop a differentiated unit of instruction to demonstrate their ability to apply the content of the course. During the practicum methods courses, ELED 538 Mathematics MAT Practicum, ELED 537 Science MAT Practicum, and ELED 524 Developmental Reading MAT Practicum II, candidates construct and implement lessons, applying instructional models, techniques, and strategies that meet student needs and promote learning. During ELED 528 Social Studies in the Elementary School, candidates construct a thematic unit that is keyed to the National Council for the Social Studies Standards and/or those standards developed by the appropriate professional organizations in History, Civics, Economics and Geography. Diversity is addressed through the requirement that the unit must be approached from at least two perspectives that might include gender, class, ethnic or racial views, and when possible, attend to democratic values such as justice, freedom, equality and equity. The focus on diversity continues during the student teaching component of their programs, and candidates are specifically assessed with respect to their ability to address the diverse learning needs represented in their placements.

TECHNOLOGY

Competence in technology is demonstrated in many ways. Program courses, including methods courses, have expectations that candidates will use technology to accomplish course requirements. In addition, all candidates in initial certification programs must demonstrate proficiency using technology to enhance teaching and learning by meeting the Technology Competency Requirement prior to student teaching. The following areas have been identified as essential for all teachers: word processing; spreadsheet; copyright and ethics; and the world wide web. Candidates have various options to fulfill the Technology Competency requirement. They may learn the required skills independently and pass the Technology Competency Test, or they may elect to take INST 251: Introduction to Emerging Technologies, a three-credit course that addresses each competency. Candidates who take and pass this course meet the Technology Competency requirements.

Candidates learn about integrating technology into instruction during program courses. Most courses use Blackboard as a means of communicating between faculty and candidates. In addition, several of the courses are held in the STEM Center in classrooms that are state-of-the-art technologically. These classrooms include:

  • Dual projection (or monitors)
  • Sound reinforcement and program audio
  • Wireless microphone
  • DVD/VCR playback
  • Lectern or desk with fold-out shelf
  • PC with Sympodium 350 interactive display
  • Laptop and peripheral connections
  • Wireless networking
  • Video conferencing
  • Content capture
  • Document camera
  • Tablet PC/PC cart

Teacher candidates participate in lessons in which their instructors utilize many of these components, thus use of technology is modeled for them. Courses that are regularly held in the Stem Center include: ELED 500 Reflections: The Art and Science of Teaching; ELED 538 Mathematics MAT Practicum; ELED 537 Science MAT Practicum and ELED 518 Science in the Elementary School. During ELED 500 Reflections: The Art and Science of Teaching, candidates use Blackboard to communicate with the instructor and each other, and to access assignments and content as well as to submit assignments. They also prepare and present on a research topic and use the technology in the classroom to conduct a PowerPoint presentation using the Instructor PC and dual projectors, document camera, and links to the World Wide Web, incorporating video clips into presentations, etc. They are also required to share links from the WWW that relate to coursework. In ELED 538 Mathematics MAT Practicum, candidates also use Blackboard in ways similar to ELED 500, accessing course content and assignments, communicating with the instructor and each other, and submitting assignments. ELED 537 Science MAT Practicum is the course most heavily weighted in technology. Teacher candidates use the following tools during the course:

  • Blackboard Learning Management System-to access course materials, share ideas individually and small groups, submit assignments, and receive feedback/grades.
  • Chalk and Wire Assessment Management System: Teacher candidates purchase a subscription to C&W, develop e-course portfolio and a program “Preparing to Teach” portfolio artifact.
  • Web browsers - to access readings and other resources
  • e-mail
  • Scanner and digital camera for completing a Chalk and Wire course portfolio, preparing lesson materials.
  • Classroom laptops
  • Classroom response system
  • Video-conferencing equipment

The instructor teaches one class period about integrating technologies in the candidates' science teaching. They become aware of ISTE standards. Teacher candidates browse web sites, view video clips, and reflect on the prospects of using these “emerging” technologies for 21st Century classrooms:

  • digital microscopy
  • probeware for digital data collection
  • online video streaming
  • interactive simulations
  • interactive white board (smart board)
  • digital photography (pocket-sized camcorders)

Finally, at field placement site, teacher candidates use the following:

  • Document camera
  • Tablet PCs
  • Connectivity to Internet
  • Digital projector
  • Scanner/printer
  • Video streaming (Discovery Education)
  • Classroom response system (i>clickers.com)
  • PowerPoint

As a result, candidates are well prepared to use technology to enhance their lessons when it is available in the field sites during the final phase of their programs, which is their full semester student teaching.

K-12 STANDARDS and STATE INITIATIVES

ELED MAT candidates receive extensive instruction in K-12 Standards and RI state initiatives, as well as information on how to stay abreast of new developments and initiatives. The first program course, CEP 552 Psychological Perspectives on Learning and Teaching places a heavy emphasis on Response To Intervention (RTI), preparing candidates for addressing varying learning needs in the classroom. During ELED 500 Reflections: The Art and Science of Teaching, the first assignment candidates complete requires them to research initiatives on the RIDE web site. They must find out about teacher certification requirements and how to maintain them for their certification; they find out about GLEs and NECAPS and how they relate to each other. They find and analyze NECAP results for one grade in one school where they would like to teach. They find and describe the School Accountability for Learning and Teaching (SALT) cycle. They are asked to then reflect on how each of these components will affect their professional lives as teachers and this is followed by a lengthy discussion in class of the implications of these initiatives. The adoption of the Common Core Standards was discussed, as well as changes in maintaining certification and the new teacher evaluation system. Candidates are then given the Rhode Island Professional Teaching Standards and participate in activities in class designed to educate them on what they mean in classroom practice. This is followed by an assignment in which they go out to an elementary classroom and conduct an observation in which they identify the standards evident in the lesson they observe. Candidates teach a six-lesson afterschool program, and must identify standards associated with each lesson, including the RIPTS and specific standards associated with the content of the lessons, including the National Standards for Arts Education, 2008 National Initial Physical Education Teacher Education Standards, or 2008 NCATE Health Education Teacher Preparation Standards. During methods courses, candidates construct, and in three courses teach, lessons that are based on the associated GLEs or GSEs. In ELED 538 Mathematics MAT Practicum, for example, candidates take a NECAP practice test and then conduct activities with the GLEs, including conducting and analysis to see if there is alignment between the two. Subsequently they construct and teach an eight-lesson mathematics unit that is aligned with appropriate math GLEs. In ELED 537 Science MAT Practicum, candidates teach science lessons associated national science standards and complete an artifact that assesses their competence in RIPTS 9.

OTHER

Dr. James Barton
For more than 20 years Dr. Barton has been collaboratively consulting with teachers in the following Rhode Island school districts: Providence, Pawtucket, Lincoln, Warwick, Cranston, Coventry, Exeter/West Greenwich, Chariho, Block Island and Little Compton.

Dr. Jennifer Duerr
Dr. Duerr has two publications currently in press.
Literacy Lessons to Help Kids Get Fit and Healthy: Scholastic, NY. (in press).
Betting on Theory for a Win-Win: Poker and Literature Discussion Groups, Journal of Reading, (in press).

Dr. Anne Goodrow
Dr. Goodrow is the Co-Principal Investigator on the Teaching and Learning Multiplication Through Lesson Study Project, which includes 27 teachers in grades K-8, in East Providence and Cumberland, RI (2010).

Dr. Goodrow is a Fellow in the Education Alliance at Brown University. She participates in Project BRITE (Brown's Response to Improving Teacher Education in Rhode Island), which has as its goal, to aid higher education faculty in preparing new teachers to address the language and literacy needs of English language learners (2010).

Dr. Goodrow facilitates a series of NCTM e-workshops offered for mathematics teachers in Rhode Island and sponsored by the RI STEM Center in conjunction with the Rhode Island Mathematics Teachers Association (2010).

Dr. Goodrow is collaborating in the planning of the RI STEM Conference, noted in RI's Race To The Top proposal and scheduled for May 6, 2011 at RIC.

Dr. Goodrow presented at Rhode Island College's Promising Practices Conference. She shared classroom-based research about teaching mathematics to students in grade 4 (November, 2010).

Dr. Elizabeth Henshaw
Dr. Henshaw presented two papers in 2009 and 2010.
Henshaw, E. (2010). The Effect of Educational philosophy on Teaching and Learning in a Culturally Diverse Classroom. Presented at Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University in Port Elizabeth, South Africa.

Henshaw, E. & McGuire-Schwartz, M.E. (2009, February) Culturally responsive education: Preparing pre-service teachers to understand and learn about different cultures and values to gain perspective of the global community. Paper presented at the Association of Teacher Educators Conference, Dallas, TX.

Dr. Henshaw coordinated an effort by a small group of ELED 436: Teaching Social Studies in the Elementary School teacher candidates to create a simulation lesson: Immigration into USA through Ellis Island. The simulation lesson was created for fifth-grade students at Mary Fogarty Elementary School, South Providence, RI. Use link to view project http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12653951/Ellis%20Island.ppt

Dr. Martha Horn
Dr. Horn is the 2010 recipient of the Rhode Island College Honor Roll Award.
Dr. Horn was a featured presenter at the Literacy for All Conference, Providence RI, 2010. Paper presented: Listening to Our Students as a Way to Help the Writing Improve.
Dr. Horn was a featured speaker at University of Texas Writing Project, November 2008. Paper presented: Talking, Drawing, Writing in the Primary Writing Classroom.

Dr. MacGregor Kniseley
Dr. Kniseley published, I>clicker Pedagogy Case Study: Clickers in Elementary Classrooms (2009).
http://www.iclicker.com/dnn/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=7nfqA6ju5ys%3D&tabid=168

Dr. Maria Lawrence
Since 2004, Dr. Lawrence has been a member of the Sherlock Center on disabilities Universal Design for Learning Workgroup comprised of higher education faculty (URI and RIC). The Center is dedicated to research and advocation of UDL in pre-K-16 education. Presentations on UDL include, USA and international conferences and professional development offerings to educators.  Curriculum project and related resources developed by the workgroup can be found online, http://www.ric.edu/sherlockcenter/udl.html

Dr. Lawrence is the Coordinator of the Rhode Island Geography Education Alliance (2005 2010).

Dr. Lawrence is a Board Member and Board President Nuweetooun School at Tomaquag Indian Memorial Museum. TIMM is an educational non-profit 501c3 organization. Support fundraising activities, curricular design, and exhibit development. (2008-2010).

Dr. Lawrence is a consultant with the Southern New England Tribal Youth Science Initiative Project Grades 6-12. This initiative project engages Native youth, from regional (RI, MA) schools, in informal science education programming.

Dr. Corinne McKamey
Dr. McKamey received the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award, Wellesley Centers for Women, Wellesley College (2009-2010).
Program Focus:  Behavioral research training on variations in child and adolescent development e.g. how variations in race and ethnicity, gender and social class interact with risk and resiliency factors in human development.
Program Aim:  Enable novice scholars to launch independent research careers through external funding.

Dr. McKamey earned two publications and presented at three conferences.

Bernard, R., C. Cervoni, C. Desir, & C. McKamey (2010). Understanding the “I” in the Academy in Luttrell, W., ed. Qualitative Research in Education Reader.  New York:  Routledge.

Porche, M., C. McKamey & P. Wong (2009). Positive Influences of Education and Recruitment on Aspirations of High School Girls to Study Engineering in College.  American Society for Engineering Education.  Published conference Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education, Austin Texas.

McKamey, C. (2010). Making Washington High like you: a case study of an immigrant high school student's identity formation.  Narrative Matters Conference, Fredericton Canada.

McKamey, C. & M. Porche (2010). “We mixed and stirred,” and “that excited me!”  Collective and individual identity formation in urban high school science labs,” Society for Research on Adolescents Conference, Philadelphia PA.

Charmaraman, L. & C. McKamey (2010). Urban middle school youth's perspectives on relationships: a visual and textual analysis, Society for Research on Adolescents Conference, Philadelphia PA

Dr. Madeline Nixon
Dr. Nixon is the faculty advisor for the Rhode Island College Sorority, Zeta Xi Delta (2008-2010).
Dr. Nixon is on the Committee to produce a statewide Poetry Anthology written by children in grades K-12 (2007-2010).

   
up comprised of higher education faculty (URI and RIC). The Center is dedicated to research and advocation of UDL in pre-K-16 education. Presentations on UDL include, USA and international conferences and professional development offerings to educators.  Curriculum project and related resources developed by the workgroup can be found online, http://www.ric.edu/sherlockcenter/udl.html

Dr. Lawrence is the Coordinator of the Rhode Island Geography Education Alliance (2005 2010).

Dr. Lawrence is a Board Member and Board President Nuweetooun School at Tomaquag Indian Memorial Museum. TIMM is an educational non-profit 501c3 organization. Support fundraising activities, curricular design, and exhibit development. (2008-2010).

Dr. Lawrence is a consultant with the Southern New England Tribal Youth Science Initiative Project Grades 6-12. This initiative project engages Native youth, from regional (RI, MA) schools, in informal science education programming.

Dr. Corinne McKamey
Dr. McKamey received the Ruth L. Kirschstein National Research Service Award, Wellesley Centers for Women, Wellesley College (2009-2010).
Program Focus:  Behavioral research training on variations in child and adolescent development e.g. how variations in race and ethnicity, gender and social class interact with risk and resiliency factors in human development.
Program Aim:  Enable novice scholars to launch independent research careers through external funding.

Dr. McKamey earned two publications and presented at three conferences.

Bernard, R., C. Cervoni, C. Desir, & C. McKamey (2010). Understanding the “I” in the Academy in Luttrell, W., ed. Qualitative Research in Education Reader.  New York:  Routledge.

Porche, M., C. McKamey & P. Wong (2009). Positive Influences of Education and Recruitment on Aspirations of High School Girls to Study Engineering in College.  American Society for Engineering Education.  Published conference Proceedings from the Annual Meeting of the American Society for Engineering Education, Austin Texas.

McKamey, C. (2010). Making Washington High like you: a case study of an immigrant high school student's identity formation.  Narrative Matters Conference, Fredericton Canada.

McKamey, C. & M. Porche (2010). “We mixed and stirred,” and “that excited me!”  Collective and individual identity formation in urban high school science labs,” Society for Research on Adolescents Conference, Philadelphia PA.

Charmaraman, L. & C. McKamey (2010). Urban middle school youth's perspectives on relationships: a visual and textual analysis, Society for Research on Adolescents Conference, Philadelphia PA

Dr. Madeline Nixon
Dr. Nixon is the faculty advisor for the Rhode Island College Sorority, Zeta Xi Delta (2008-2010).
Dr. Nixon is on the Committee to produce a statewide Poetry Anthology written by children in grades K-12 (2007-2010).