Johns Hopkins University

School of Education
Language Acquisition
ED.811.641.TL11.SP20
Spring 2020

Instructor(s):
Name: Dr. Staci Williams
Phone Number: (469) 684-2449
JHU E-mail Address: swill285@jh.edu

Credit Hours: 3 credits

Class Times: 5:30- 8:00

Dates Class Time Office Hours

Tuesday, January 28, 2020

Tuesday, February 4, 2020
Tuesday, February 11, 2020
Tuesday, February 18, 2020
Tuesday, February 25, 2020
Tuesday, March 3, 2020 5:30- 8:00 4:30- 5:30
Tuesday, March 24, 2020
Tuesday, March 31, 2020
Tuesday, April 7, 2020
Friday, April 10, 2020
Tuesday, April 14, 2020
Tuesday, April 21, 2020
Tuesday, April 28, 2020
Friday, May 1, 2020
Tuesday, May 5, 2020

Course Description:

1
Participants will look deeply at three major topics that are important to supporting linguistically and
culturally diverse students in urban, secondary education settings: language variation, academic language,
and second language acquisition. Participants will explore these interrelated topics, attending to both
socio-cultural and cognitive-linguistic perspectives on learning and learning environments. The purpose
of the course is to guide educators to use linguistic awareness to inform their teaching. Participants will
examine state standards and the role of language in assessment and learning.

Course Learning Objectives

Participants will be able to:
● Understand the processes of language acquisition and the influencing factors
● Learn about their students’ language and language choices and value students’ primary
language/dialect
● Understand the features of Standard/Informal and Academic/Formal language and how to
incorporate it in the classroom
● Investigate a number of powerful strategies for adding Standard/Informal and Academic/Formal
language to their students’ repertoire, while respecting their primary language
● Be prepared to work with students, collect data, design/implement/reflect on lessons that integrate
language and content instruction

Course Objectives Assessment

Learning Objectives from the Program
At the end of this course, participants will be able to:
C.1. Lesson Structure and Alignment: Provide high- quality, standards- Key Assignment
based, learning experiences for students
C.2. Differentiation: Ensure that the content and experiences are accessible Key Assignment
for diverse learners; based on student data
C.3. Academic Rigor: Continuously push for ongoing development and Key Assignment
deep understanding of the lesson content; based on student data.
D.1. Promote Talk: Hold all students accountable for participating in Key Assignment
respectful academic conversations
D.2. Orchestrate Talk: Deliberately orchestrate academic talk Key Assignment
D.3. Ensure High Quality Talk: Strategically maintain the quality of Key Assignment
instructional talk and writing
E.3. Locus of Control: Take responsibility for successes and failures. Key Assignment
Additional Learning Objectives Specific to the Course
Understand the processes of language acquisition and the influencing factors Academic Language, Key
Assignment
Learn about their students’ language and language choices and value Transcript Analysis
students’ primary language/dialect
Understand the features of Standard/Informal and Academic/Formal Academic Language, Key
language and how to incorporate it in the classroom Assignment, Clinical
Application

2
 Course Objectives Assessment
Investigate a number of powerful strategies for adding Standard/Informal Academic Language, Key
and Academic/Formal language to their students’ repertoire, while Assignment, Clinical
respecting their primary language Application
Be prepared to work with students, collect data, design/implement/reflect on Transcript Analysis, Academic
lessons that integrate language and content instruction Language, Key Assignment,
Clinical Application

Required Text and Other Materials

Adams, M.J. (2011). Advancing our students’ language and literacy: The challenge of complex texts.
American Educator, 34(4), 3–11.
Brennan, W. (2018). Julie Washington’s quest to get schools to respect African-American English. The
Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/04/the-code-
switcher/554099/
Cuny, C. (2014). What is the value of life?: And other Socratic questions. Educational Leadership, 72(3),
54–58.
Deggans, E. (2013, April 10). Learning how to code-switch: Humbling but necessary. Retrieved from
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/04/10/176234171/learning-how-to-code-switch-
humbling-but-necessary
Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children.
Harvard Educational Review, 58 (3), 280-298.
Hart, B. & Risely, T. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap. American Educator, 27(1),
4–9.
Martínez, R. (2010). "Spanglish" as literacy tool: Toward an understanding of the potential role of
Spanish-English code-switching in the development of academic literacy. Research in the
Teaching of English, 45(2), 124–149.
Michaels, S., O’Connor, M.C., Hall, M.W., & Resnick, L.B. (2010). Accountable Talk® sourcebook: For
classroom conversation that works. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Institute for
Learning.
Nachowitz, M., & Brumer, N. (2014). Teaching the talk, not the text. Voices from the Middle, 22(1), 15–
21.
Nagy, W., & Townsend, D. (2012). Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as language
acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 91–108.
Rubinstein-Ávila, E., & Fink, L. (2013). Scaffolding content and language demands for "reclassified"
students. Voices from the Middle, 20(4), 28–33.
Snow, C.E., & Uccelli, P. (2009). The challenge of academic language. In: D.R. Olson, & N. Torrance
(Eds). The Cambridge Handbook of Literacy, 112–133.
Soifer, L. (2012, November 20). Dr. Lydia Soifer: The Development of Language Skills in Young
Children | 92Y Parenting & Family [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzpkRZvdOCw
Thompson, M. (2013, April 13). Five reasons why people code-switch. Retrieved from
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/04/13/177126294/five-reasons-why-people-code-
switch
Vetter, A. (2013). “You need some laugh bones!”: Leveraging AAL in a high school English classroom.
Journal of Literacy Research, 45(2), 173–206.
Wheeler, R. (2008). Becoming adept at code-switching. Educational Leadership, 65(7), 54–58.

3
Zwiers, J. & Crawford, M. (2009). How to start academic conversations. Educational Leadership, 66(7),
70–73.

Assignments

Examining Language
Due: Session 3; Total Value: 10%

Collect and transcribe a two-minute language sample. Audio (or video) record a two-minute language
sample. Your sample can come from anyone, any age, anywhere. Transcribe exactly what was said (as
closely as possible). Label speakers by “S1” for the first speaker, “S2” for the second speaker, etc. Put
your name at the top of the transcription, but do not provide any information about where the sample was
recorded nor any context of the interaction.

Transcript Analysis and Overview

Due: Session 7; Total Value: 15%

Choose at least two students who you believe are bi-dialectal (i.e., speak another language at home, often
code-switch). After gaining their permission, listen in to a conversation and note any features of AAVE or
functions of bilingual communication. Interview the students you listened to about their beliefs about
language and what they believe about their own code-switching. Ask them about formal and informal
uses of language. Include your interview findings with your eavesdropping synopsis.

Academic Language Lesson

Due: Session 10; Total Value: 15%

In class, we will work together to identify and/or develop lessons that explicitly teach academic (formal)
language vs. standard (informal) language. Using the models presented in class, and the information you
gained from your previous Clinical Assignments, you will develop your own lesson plan and then teach it
to a small group of students. You will be required to video record your teaching and submit the video,
along with the lesson plan and post-teaching critical reflection.

Key Assignment: Promoting Academic Discourse

Due: Session 13; Total Value: 35%; See Appendix B for Rubric

For the Key Assignment, you will develop and teach a lesson that deepens students’ knowledge, or
understanding, of a topic through the use of academic language/discourse. The lesson should clearly
illustrate how you, as the teacher, were able to structure the opportunity for discourse in a way that
deepened student knowledge.

During the lesson, you will need to collect student data to provide evidence that your students met the
objectives of the lesson and to provide an opportunity for you to evaluate the quality of student dialogue.
After you have analyzed this data, write up and present your analysis of students’ progress in relation to
the standards with a particular focus on the students’ use of academic language. Include clear next steps
for students when it comes to meeting the demands of your districts speaking/listening standards. You

4
must also include a post-teaching reflection of your role in planning, structuring, and enacting the
discourse as well as your own learning about incorporating academic discourse in the classroom.

You may develop your lesson based on models presented in class or you may teach a lesson from your
required curriculum, revising as needed to address the needs of your students and specific goals and
objectives (content/reading and speaking/language based). You are required to video record this lesson
and upload the tagged video along with the lesson plan and post-teaching reflection.

Clinical Application
Due: Session 15; Total Value: 15%

For this final assignment, you will apply what you have learned to curriculum found in your clinical
context (approved or assigned by your instructor). While you have crafted individual learning
experiences for students in earlier assignments, it is important for you to understand how this work can
and needs to be embedded as a part of your daily practice as a teacher.

In your assigned grade band groups, you will collaborate on an analysis of a lesson from curriculum that
is utilized at your program site. As part of this analysis, you will identify strengths and opportunities for
growth in the plan, supported by course readings and content. Finally, you will script modifications to the
existing plan to incorporate strategies that promote academic language along with exemplar responses and
scaffolding questions that will support the quality of talk appropriate to content and grade level standard.

Participation
Total Value: 10% (See Participation Rubric)
Evaluation and Grading
Examining Language 10%

Transcript Analysis and Overview 15%

Academic Language Lesson 15%

Key Assignment 35%

Clinical Application 15%

Attendance and Participation 10%

Grading Scale
Proficiency is 80% on all assignments.
Letter Grade Percentage Range
A 94–100%
A- 90–93%
B+ 87–89%
B 84–86%
B- 80–83%

5
 C+ 77–79%
C 74–76%
C- 70–73%
F below 70%
The grades of D+, D, and D- are not awarded at the graduate level.

Request for Assignment Extension:

Extensions (and extension due dates) are granted at the discretion of the instructor. If participants realize
within a reasonable period of time before an assignment is due that they will be unable to complete the
assignment on time, they must request an extension in writing through an email to their instructor.
Participants may ask for an extension from the course instructor no later than twenty-four (24) hours
before an assignment is due. Participants must request this extension from the course instructor in
advance and propose a new date to submit the assignment.

In the event of an unforeseen emergency, the instructors may waive the requirement that an extension be
requested at least twenty-four (24) hours in advance. However, participants are still required to request an
extension in writing with a proposed deadline to submit the assignment.

Failure to meet any agreed-upon assignment extension due dates will make the penalties for late
assignments take effect beginning at the adjusted due date.

Penalties for Late Work:

Work submitted late without prior approval will not be accepted without penalty.

Any work submitted late without prior approval will result in a five percent (5%) deduction per day from
the total earned score with a maximum deduction of 30%. The assignment must be submitted within two
weeks of the original due date and prior to the last course session. After two weeks, late assignments for
which extensions were not requested will be accepted only at the discretion of the course instructor and in
extraordinary circumstances.

Key Assignment Re-submissions:

Key assignments are the only assignment that can be resubmitted for a new grade. Course instructors have
one week from the published due date to grade and return key assignments to participants. A participant
can re-submit a key assignment only in the case when a participant’s overall course grade will fall below
a B because of the original grade on the key assignment. In addition, only key assignments that were
originally submitted on time and scored above a C- may be re-submitted. Key assignments and their due
dates are clearly indicated on the course syllabi.

The deadline for re-submission of a key assignment is one (1) week from the return of the assignment.
This re-submission is not mandatory, but participants should note the implications of choosing not to re-
submit an assignment that may impact an overall course grade. Participants who exercise this option in
their final semester will likely be required to delay their graduation to the following semester.

Participation Rubric

6
 Points Behaviors

10 ● Always arrives on time;

● Consistently participates fully without prompting in every aspect of
class (DO NOWS, general class discussion, discussions of readings,
peer reviews, or critical friends);
● Respects and adheres to the class schedule, including, but not limited
to, timed breaks;
● Does not engage in unrelated (side bar) conversations and unrelated
work;
● Reads every assigned reading and comes to class ready to discuss and
provide thoughtful, reflective comments; and
● Always brings required coursework materials to class, including
course syllabus, binders, lesson plans, readings, and additional
requested materials.

6–9 ● Arrives late no more than one (1) time to class during the semester;
● Regularly participates in every aspect of the class without prompting;
● Respects and adheres to the class schedule, including, but not limited
to, timed breaks;
● Rarely engages in unrelated conversations and unrelated work;
● Reads most assigned readings and comes to class ready to discuss
and provide thoughtful, reflective comments; and
● Regularly brings required coursework materials to class, including
course syllabus, binders, lesson plans, readings, and additional
requested materials.

0–5 ● Frequently arrives late to class (arriving any time after class start
time);
● Occasionally participates (with or without prompting) in every aspect
of class
● Regularly respects and adheres to the class schedule, including, but
not limited to, timed breaks;
● Engages in unrelated conversations and work;
● Frequently comes to class unprepared;
● Frequently does not complete assigned readings and comes to class
unprepared to discuss and provide thoughtful comments; and
● Regularly fails to bring coursework materials to class including,
course syllabus, binders, lesson plans, readings, and additional
requested materials.

Course Outline

7
Session Topic Advance Readings Assignment(s) Due

1 The role of language Read the syllabus and

• Language in the bring questions about
January 28, 2020 standards course to class.
• How we learn
language Bring technology to
access standards during
class.

2 Language Soifer, L. (2012,

development over time November 20).
February 4, 2020 • Stages and
characteristics
of language
development
• L2 Acquisition
and Stages

3 Impacts on and of Examining Language

language Due
February 11, 2020 • Influences on
language
development
• How language
influences
identity

4 Code-switching Deggans, E. (2013, April

• Dialect, 10)
February 18, 2020 register,
code Thompson, M. (2013,
switching April 13)
• How and
why we
code-switch

5 Code-switching across Martínez, R. (2010)

cultures
February 25, 2020 • English Vetter, A. (2013)
Language
Learners
• African
American
Vernacular
English

6 Responding Re-read:

8
 respectfully to Delpit, L. (1988)
March 3, 2020 language differences

7 Academic language Nagy, W., & Townsend, Transcript Analysis

development D. (2012) Due
March 24, 2020 • What is
academic Snow, C.E., & Uccelli, P.
language (2009)
• The importance
of academic
language

8 Supporting all Wheeler, R. (2008)

students with
March 31, 2020 academic language Brennan, W. (2018)
• Teaching
academic
language
• Supporting
English
Language
Learners

9 Classroom practices Adams, M.J. (2011)

that support academic
April 7, 2020 language development Hart, B. & Risely, T.
• Academic (2003)
Vocabulary
• Scaffolding Rubinstein-Ávila, E., &
Fink, L. (2013)

10 Incorporating Nachowitz, M., & Academic Language

discussion to support Brumer, N. (2014). Lesson Due
April 10, 2020 academic language
• Accountable Michaels, S., O’Connor,
Talk M. C., Hall, M.W., &
• Classroom talk Resnick, L.B. (2010)
strategies

11 Analyzing Instruction
for Improvement
April 14, 2020 • Assignment
Case Studies

9
 • Improving
Instruction via
Reflection

12 Structuring Cuny, C. (2014)

Classroom Discourse
April 21, 2020 • Key Zwiers, J. & Crawford,
Assignment M. (2009)
model lesson
• Teachers role in
planning
discourse

13 Structuring Key Assignment Due

Classroom Discourse
April 28, 2020 • Enacting the
lesson
• Collecting data
from discourse,
Kid-watching

14 Transference to
Clinical Application
May 1, 2020 • Critically
Examining and
Unpacking
Curricula
related to Talk
• The connection
between talk
and writing

15 Implications for Clinical Application

Subsequent Due
May 5, 2020 Instruction
• Moving from
prescriptive to
authentic
discourse
• Evaluating
Opportunities
for Talk in
Curricula

Announcements
During the semester, the instructor may post announcements on Blackboard. It is your responsibility as a

10
student to read all announcements and to contact the instructor with any questions that may arise as a
result.

Policy Statements

Academic Conduct
The School of Education places the highest value on intellectual integrity and personal trust within
our community. All SOE students assume an obligation to conduct themselves in a manner
appropriate to the Johns Hopkins University’s mission as an institution of higher education and with
accepted standards of ethical and professional conduct. Students must demonstrate personal integrity
and honesty at all times in completing classroom assignments and examinations, in carrying out their
fieldwork or other applied learning activities, and in their interactions with others. Students are
obligated to refrain from acts they know or, under the circumstances, have reason to know will impair
their integrity or the integrity of the University. Refer to the school’s website for more information
regarding the academic misconduct policy.

Please note that student work may be submitted to an online plagiarism detection tool at the discretion
of the course instructor. If student work is deemed plagiarized, the course instructor shall follow the
policy and procedures governing academic misconduct as laid out in the School of Education’s
Academic Catalog.

Attendance
Participants are expected to attend each class session, arriving on time. Absences and tardiness may
result in a lower course grade. It is the participant’s responsibility to ensure they have a full
understanding of the course content and information missed during an absence. This includes
reviewing materials that the instructor has placed on Blackboard, connecting with peers, and
following up with the instructor with any questions/clarifications ideally within 24-36 hours after the
absence. Participants are encouraged to reach out to instructors during posted office hours for
additional support. Multiple occurrences of absences and/or tardiness in a course may result in the
lowering of the final course grade up to one full letter grade.

All absences should be communicated to the appropriate clinical faculty member by the participant in
advance of the missed class, or, if circumstances do not allow for that, as soon as possible and
including an explanation of the reason it was not communicated in advance. Absences from
coursework for school-related events will not be excused. The Site Team can help reinforce this
policy with principals and school staff, if assistance is needed.

Academic Continuity
Please note that in the event of serious consequences arising from extreme weather conditions,
communicable health problems, or other extraordinary circumstances, the School of Education may
change the normal academic schedule and/or make appropriate changes to course structure, format,
and delivery. (For example, a class session may be delivered online via Blackboard in the event that
the regularly scheduled face-to-face class session is cancelled.) In the event such changes become

11
 necessary, information will be posted on the School of Education website and communicated to you
via email and/or Blackboard.

Classroom Accommodations for Students with Disabilities

If you are a student with a documented disability who requires an academic adjustment, auxiliary aid
or other similar accommodations, please contact Jennifer Eddinger in the Disability Services Office at
410-516-9734 or via email at soe.disabilityservices@jhu.edu.

(For more information please visit the School of Education’s Disability Services website.)

Diversity
The Johns Hopkins School of Education (SOE) defines diversity as follows:

The United States is rich in diversity and its influence is global. Mindful of this, the SOE defines
diversity in a myriad of ways: by ethnicity, religion, race, gender identity, age, national origin,
exceptionalities, ideology, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. The education of our
candidates involves a respect for diversity, meaning that each individual should be recognized for his
or her own abilities, interests, ideas, and cultural identity.

Other Policies
This syllabus details certain key policies. You should refer to the online syllabus supplement webpage
for a fuller listing of other important policies of which all students should be aware.

Course Evaluation
Please remember to complete an online course evaluation survey for this course. These evaluations are an
important tool in the School of Education’s ongoing efforts to improve instructional quality and
strengthen its programs. The results of the course evaluations are kept anonymous – your instructor will
only receive aggregated data and comments for the entire class. An email with a link to the online course
evaluation form will be sent to your JHU email address towards the end of the course. Thereafter, you
will be sent periodic email reminders until you complete the evaluation. There is also a module on the My
Institution page where you can access the evaluation and prompts to complete the evaluation when you
log into Blackboard. Please remember to activate your JHU email account and to check it regularly.
(Please note that it is the School of Education’s policy to send all faculty, staff, and student email
communications to a JHU email address, rather than to personal or work email addresses.) If you are
having difficulty accessing the course evaluation, you haven’t received an email notification about the
course evaluation, or if you have any questions in general about the course evaluation process, please
contact SOEEvalKit@jhu.edu. (Please note that if a course has fewer than three enrolled students, SOE
will not conduct an online course evaluation survey for the course.)

Bibliography
Adams, M.J. (2011). Advancing our students’ language and literacy: The challenge of complex texts.
American Educator, 34(4), 3–11.

12
Brennan, W. (2018). Julie Washington’s quest to get schools to respect African-American English. The
Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2018/04/the-code-
switcher/554099/
Cuny, C. (2014). What is the value of life?: And other Socratic questions. Educational Leadership, 72(3),
54–58.
Deggans, E. (2013, April 10). Learning how to code-switch: Humbling but necessary. Retrieved from
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/04/10/176234171/learning-how-to-code-switch-
humbling-but-necessary
Delpit, L. (1988). The silenced dialogue: Power and pedagogy in educating other people's children.
Harvard Educational Review, 58(3), 280–298.
Hart, B. & Risely, T. (2003). The early catastrophe: The 30 million word gap. American Educator, 27(1),
4–9.
Martínez, R. (2010). "Spanglish" as literacy tool: Toward an understanding of the potential role of
Spanish-English code-switching in the development of academic literacy. Research in the
Teaching of English, 45(2), 124–149.
Michaels, S., O’Connor, M. C., Hall, M. W., & Resnick, L. B. (2010). Accountable Talk® sourcebook:
For classroom conversation that works. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Institute for
Learning.
Nachowitz, M., & Brumer, N. (2014). Teaching the talk, not the text. Voices from the Middle, 22(1), 15-
21.
Nagy, W., & Townsend, D. (2012). Words as tools: Learning academic vocabulary as language
acquisition. Reading Research Quarterly, 47(1), 91-108.
Rubinstein-Ávila, E., & Fink, L. (2013). Scaffolding content and language demands for "reclassified"
students. Voices from the Middle, 20(4), 28-33.
Snow, C.E., & Uccelli, P. (2009). The challenge of academic language. In: D.R. Olson, & N. Torrance
(Eds). The Cambridge Handbook of Literacy, 112–133.
Soifer, L. (2012, November 20). Dr. Lydia Soifer: The Development of Language Skills in Young
Children | 92Y Parenting & Family [Video file]. Retrieved from
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TzpkRZvdOCw
Thompson, M. (2013, April 13). Five reasons why people code-switch. Retrieved from
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2013/04/13/177126294/five-reasons-why-people-code-
switch
Vetter, A. (2013). “You need some laugh bones!”: Leveraging AAL in a high school English classroom.
Journal of Literacy Research, 45(2), 173–206.
Wheeler, R. (2008). Becoming adept at code-switching. Educational Leadership, 65(7), 54–58.
Zwiers, J. & Crawford, M. (2009). How to start academic conversations. Educational Leadership, 66(7),
70–73.

Attachments
Appendix A – Dispositions of the School of Education
Appendix B – Rubrics

13
 APPENDIX A
Dispositions of the School of Education
The goal of these dispositions is to illustrate our continued commitment, as a member of Johns Hopkins
University, to produce candidates who are aware and ethical in pursuing their chosen practice.

All candidates who complete a certificate, master's degree, and/or doctorate in the School of Education
will be:

1. Research Centered

1.1 Committed to Inquiry and Innovation

Candidates will a) be prepared to foster in others and engage in themselves the pursuit of life-long
learning, continuous self-reflection, and research within their own practice or beyond; b) maintain
fluency in scholarship in their field, professional knowledge, as well as in effective and ethical
practices; c) evaluate and effectively implement appropriate new methods and tools; and d)
incorporate appropriate knowledge-building technologies in their practice.

1.2 Committed to Being a Reflective Practitioner

Candidates will a) actively engage in critical, creative, and metacognitive thinking to support
conceptual understanding; and b) engage in independent and interdependent problem solving and
experiential approaches to learning.

1.3 Committed to Practice-Centered Research

Candidates will a) seek links between research in the field and application in professional
practice; b) define their professional identity not only as scholars, but also as producers of
research as a method of improving professional practice; and c) seek to understand the context of
professional practice to deepen the understanding and application of their research.

2. Collaborative

2.1 Committed to Creating Positive Climates

Candidates will a) promote a climate in which learning is valued and on-going; b) provide
choices to enable all to share in and contribute to social and intellectual life; and c) uphold fair
and equitable standards for conduct that encourage responsibility, mutual respect, and civic
values, and that safeguard the physical, intellectual, and emotional well-being of each and every
member of the community.

2.2 Committed to Active Engagement

Candidates will a) actively engage in a community of learners that develop relationships,
programs, and projects with colleagues in P-20 schools and educational agencies designed to

14
 improve the quality of education for each and every student and education professional; and b)
contribute professionally to the field at local, regional, state, and national levels.

3. Socially and Culturally Conscious

3.1 Committed to Fostering Social Justice

Candidates will a) seek to understand their own privileges and/or prejudices, the stereotypes
embedded in educational materials, rules/laws, policies and the cultural bias that exist in schools
and other education-related or societal institutions; b) work toward a global society where
equality is recognized as a basic human right; c) promote social and environmental responsibility;
and d) empower self and others to identify opportunities for growth toward excellence and equity.

3.2 Committed to Developing Cross-Cultural Competence

Candidates will a) promote respect for self, students, families, and cultures; b) demonstrate a
belief that everyone can learn and values human diversity and equity in the learning environment;
and c) examine own biases and prejudices and develop necessary awareness, attitudes,
knowledge, and skills for effectively and respectfully teaching and mentoring people whose
culture differs from their own.

4. Ethical

4.1 Committed to Acting Responsibly

Candidates will a) act with integrity, are considerate, respectful, punctual, appropriate in
appearance, conduct, and in all interactions with students, families, mentors, and colleagues; and
b) be creative and self-reliant in finding appropriate solutions to problems and managing
dilemmas.

4.2 Committed to Acting with Integrity

Candidates will a) conduct themselves in a professional manner; b) be honest, open to
constructive feedback from others, manage situations of conflict and their own stress
appropriately, and take responsibility for own actions; and c) conduct research and practice
efforts intended to discover what is rather than to prove what may be anticipated.

15
 APPENDIX B
Key Assignment Rubric

Proficient
Program Learning Assignment
Beginning Emerging (Minimum required of
Objective Component(s) Mastering
candidates)
C.1. Lesson Lesson Plan Instruction is not aligned to Instruction is aligned to the Instruction is aligned to the Instruction is aligned to the
Structure and the relevant standards. relevant standards. relevant standards. relevant standards.
Alignment: Provide
high- quality,
Instruction does not Instruction incorporates Instruction incorporates Instruction incorporates
standards-based,
learning experiences incorporate best-practice best-practices for best-practices for best-practices for
for students. for delivering instruction delivering instruction (e.g. delivering instruction (e.g. delivering instruction (e.g.
(e.g. modeling and student modeling and student modeling and student modeling and student
15% practice). practice). practice). practice).

Instruction moves students Instruction successfully

towards the learning target. moves students to meeting
the demands of the
standard.
C.2. Lesson Plan Rationale for lesson Rationale for lesson Rationale for lesson Rationale for lesson
Differentiation: instruction does not instruction includes instruction includes instruction includes
Ensure that the reference student data or reference to student data reference to student data reference to student data
content and
linguistic backgrounds. and linguistic and linguistic and linguistic
experiences are
accessible for backgrounds. backgrounds. backgrounds.
diverse learners;
based on student Specific supports for Specific supports for
data. diverse learners, including diverse learners, including
linguistically diverse linguistically diverse
10%
learners, are included. learners, are included.

Students are given

appropriate access to

1
 academic language via
teacher supports.
C.3. Academic Lesson Plan Most tasks and questions Tasks and questions are Tasks and questions are Tasks and questions are
Rigor: are closed-ended and frequently open-ended and frequently open-ended and frequently open-ended and
Continuously push require little critical require little critical require little critical require little critical
for ongoing
thinking thinking thinking thinking
development and
deep understanding
of the lesson content; No evidence of scaffolding Some scaffolding is Frequent evidence of
based on student is present in the lesson present in the lesson scaffolding in the lesson
data. that builds cognitively to
support students in
10% achieving the learning
target
D.1. Promote Talk: Video The participant does not Unsuccessful attempts are The participant uses The participant uses
Hold all students Submission attempt to engage students made to involve students in prompts that sometimes prompts that sometimes
accountable for in talk. discussion. encourage the student to encourage the student to
participating in
engage in discussion. engage in discussion.
respectful academic
conversations.
The expectations and The expectations and
15% quality of talk are quality of talk are
explicitly modeled for explicitly modeled for
students. students.

Students are held

accountable to the
appropriate expectations
for talk provided by the
teacher.
D.2. Orchestrate Lesson Plan and The participant does not The participant advances The participant advances The participant advances
Talk: Deliberately Video advance the use of the use of academic the use of academic the use of academic
orchestrate academic Submission academic language through language through language through language through
talk.
discussion. discussion. discussion. discussion.
15%
Most of the talk is teacher-
generated.
2
 The talk is student- The talk is student-
generated with guidance generated with guidance
from the teacher. from the teacher.

Students push for clarity,

synthesis, or express
disagreement with peers
with or without teacher
prompting.
D.3. Ensure High Video Student talk in the video is Student talk in the video is Student talk in the video is Student talk in the video is
Quality Talk: Submission not aligned to standards somewhat aligned to aligned to standards and/or aligned to standards and/or
Strategically and/or objectives. standards and/or objectives. objectives.
maintain the quality
objectives.
of instructional talk
and writing. Students demonstrate Students demonstrate
critical listening skills by critical listening skills by
15% restating, summarizing, restating, summarizing,
and/or paraphrasing other and/or paraphrasing other
students. students.

The teacher and/or

students push for clarity or
justification from other
students.
E.3. Locus of Reflection Participant is unable to Participant is able to Participant is able to Participant is able to
Control: clearly analyze the analyze the strengths and analyze the strengths and analyze the strengths and
Take responsibility strengths and weakness in weakness in his/her weakness in his/her weakness in his/her
for successes and
his/her instruction. instruction as well as instruction as well as instruction as well as
failures.
appropriate next steps for appropriate next steps for appropriate next steps for
20% their practice. Reflection is their practice based on their practice based on
loosely based on student student outcomes and student outcomes and
outcomes and a critical reflecting on his/her reflecting on his/her
reflection of his/her practice. practice.
practice.

3
Reflection is grounded in Reflection is grounded in
evidence from the plan and evidence from the plan and
video. video.

Writing is clear and

concise and demonstrates
an understanding of course
readings and content.