Appropriate preparation for preservice and inservice teachers for teaching content-area literacy continues to influence twenty-first century research agendas. In this systematic review (which analyzed 2,179 articles), the researcher aimed to ascertain and synthesize the research on teacher preparation for content-area literacy instruction while evaluating the methodological qualities of the research. The findings are presented in an article format with the connecting theme of content-area literacy; however, the first article focused on research regarding preservice teachers and the second article on inservice teachers. Whereas, previous reviews have primarily focused on secondary teacher beliefs and attitudes this review provides a broader scope of the research, which encompasses K-16 preservice and inservice teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, instructional practices, strategies, and knowledge of content-area literacy instruction. The major findings from research on preservice teachers are: with a minimum of one content-area literacy course, this teacher preparation may prove to be less than sufficient; in addition, preservice teachers’ beliefs regarding content-area literacy are typically positive, but actual transference once in the classroom is narrow. The major findings from the inservice article suggest the need for further training, modeling, and collaboration of literacy instruction for implementation in content classes. Inservice teachers, albeit experts of their content are restricted by their own motivation and knowledge of literacy strategies, therefore literacy implementation during class instruction is restricted. By reviewing longitudinal and current research as well as building upon previous reviews, these articles closely examine preservice and inservice teacher preparation, instruction, and implementation of literacy instruction in the content-area class.

<p> Student literacy rates across the country are unacceptably low. Teacher preparation has emerged as a priority in both research and practice in efforts to improve the nation's literacy rates. Teacher knowledge and beliefs influence the quality of instruction teachers are able to implement. This study was designed to help educators and mentors of novice teachers understand the relationship between literacy pedagogical content knowledge and literacy teacher efficacy beliefs and changes to this relationship during the course of student teaching. </p><p> Using a sample of 36 pre-service teachers assigned to student teaching in kindergarten, first or second grade classrooms, literacy pedagogical content knowledge was measured in a multiple-choice assessment that covered a variety of early literacy instructional areas including phonology, orthography, vocabulary, morphology and comprehension. Literacy teaching efficacy beliefs was measured using a self-report questionnaire. Participants completed the survey at two time points, at the beginning and end of student teaching. </p><p> To determine if a literacy pedagogical content knowledge and literacy teaching efficacy beliefs demonstrated a relationship, Pearson correlations were calculated at both time points. Results of this study suggest that these constructs are not related and operate independently. Additionally this study suggested that while literacy teaching efficacy beliefs improved significantly over the course of student teaching, literacy pedagogical content knowledge did not. Results from this study can inform teacher educators, mentors of novice teaches and professional development programmers on the relationship of literacy pedagogical content knowledge and literacy teaching efficacy beliefs in pre-service teachers.</p>

<p> The purpose of this research study was to investigate how school districts, in the state of Missouri, dispersed funds from the American Recovery Reinvestment Act (ARRA) of 2009 to help drive educational reform, with respect to reading achievement and Response to Intervention strategies. The difference between the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and other pieces of legislation aimed at educational accountability was that states were only given two years to spend the monies associated with this legislation. This quantitative research study examined 60 school districts in the state of Missouri to determine if there was a relationship between the stimulus funds provided for personnel, intervention support and professional development, and student achievement as measured by the MAP assessment. The researcher divided schools into strata of large and small districts based on enrollment of more than 3,000 students and fewer than 3,000 students respectively. Data collected included three ARRA budget codes (1100) for regular instruction, (2100) for non-instructional support, (2210) for professional development for the 2009-2010 and the 2010-2011 school years, as well as communication arts data from the MAP assessment. The literature review outlined legislation framed for educational accountability, changes in practice for students identified at-risk, and best practices in reading instruction. The researcher examined patterns in spending in non-instructional support and professional development to determine if school districts provided materials for intervention and professional development to support teachers in implementing the interventions. Using multiple regression data analysis, the researcher did not find any significant relationship between ARRA stimulus funds and student achievement as measured by the MAP assessment. Data indicated that additional funding was not the answer to improved student achievement.</p>

<p> The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to determine if READ 180 is an effective reading intervention program for English Language Learners (ELLs). School districts nationwide are seeking effective programs to close the achievement gap between ELLs and the general population in order to fulfill federally established Title III requirements. This study examined the results of the 2011-2013 Assessing Comprehension and Communication in English State-to-State (ACCESS), an English Language Proficiency assessment tool specifically designed for ELLs. At the time of this study, 35 states, including Missouri utilize the ACCESS test to measure proficiency levels of their ELLs in partial fulfillment of Title III requirements. Two rural Missouri schools, with ELL populations that exceeded 10%, participated in the study. Both school districts utilize Scholastic's READ 180 program, an intervention program specifically designed for struggling readers. The seventh and eighth grade ACCESS scale scores from both school districts were compiled and analyzed through multiple F-tests, z-tests, and t-tests. The research questions were designed to determine if there was a significant difference in the mean gain in ACCESS reading, writing, literacy, and overall scale scores of those ELLs enrolled in READ 180 and those ELLs not enrolled in READ 180. The results of the study yield mixed results. In nine of the 12 subtests, there was no significant difference in the mean gain in ACCESS scale scores. However, those ELLs who were enrolled in READ 180 for two consecutive years demonstrated the most significant differences in mean gain scores.</p>

Research paper (M.A.) -- Cardinal Stritch College -- Milwaukee, 1968. / A research paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in Education (Reading Specialist). Includes bibliographical references (57-60 p.).

Thesis (Ed.D.)--University of Delaware, 2007. / Principal faculty advisor: Rachel A. Karchmer-Klein, School of Education. Includes bibliographical references.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Texas at Austin, 1998. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 145-157). Available also in a digital version from Dissertation Abstracts.

Thesis (M.Ed.)--Kutztown University of Pennsylvania, 1976. / Source: Masters Abstracts International, Volume: 45-06, page: 2761.

Thesis (Ph.D.)--Indiana University, Dept. of Language Education, 2005. / Title from PDF t.p. (viewed Dec. 3, 2008). Source: Dissertation Abstracts International, Volume: 66-03, Section: A, page: 0936. Chair: Larry J. Mikulecky.

Thesis (Ed. D.)--West Virginia University, 2010. / Title from document title page. Document formatted into pages; contains vi, 126 p. : ill. Includes abstract. Includes bibliographical references (p. 118-126).