Are you confused by Academic Language? Are your students struggling? The purpose of this session is to demystify the Academic Language component of the edTPA® so that faculty can improve their own understanding of what is required by rubrics 4 and 14. The session leader will take the participants through an interactive lesson where meanings of the terms function, discourse, syntax and supports are learned contextually. This instructional method has been successfully used to help teacher candidates analyze the academic language of their lessons. Using a sample lesson, participants will engage in a group activity that will help them discover the language product. They will then be guided in classifying the product as either syntax or discourse. Next participants will identify the language function and the vocabulary that must be used to create the product. Participants will then brainstorm general, targeted, and individual supports. At this point, a closer look at the prompts associated with rubrics 4 and 14 will guide our discussion of ways to improve the performance of our teacher candidates.

No description available.

No description available.

In this session presenters will demonstrate specific strategies and supports that have helped our teacher candidatesimprove their performance on Task Three: Assessment. Topics include helping teacher candidates: Identify and state objectives clearly and effectively. Align standards/objectives, instruction, and assessment. Develop deeper understandings of evaluative criteria, cognitive feedback, and helping their students to use feedback. Organize and display assessment data. Conduct meaningful analysis of assessment data Use assessment data to modify instruction and to plan next steps Examples of strategies/activities/supports, as well as guidance for others to develop their own will be provided.

Response to Intervention (RTI) is an educational reform effort that is being implemented across the nation. Considering that the systematic implementation of the RTI process requires organizational change, teachers may be hesitant or resistant to engage in the change process. This study organizes the potential barriers of RTI implementation into the RTI implementation factors of vision, professional development, professional support, and time resources. This quantitative study explored the relationship between teachers' perceptions of these RTI implementation factors and teachers' self-reported RTI implementation in their classrooms. The survey results came from 553 elementary school teachers across the state of Utah (30% response rate). An analysis of the data showed that there is an impact of teachers' perceptions of RTI implementation factors on their self-reported RTI implementation efforts. There were significant relationships between teachers' perceptions of vision (p < .001), professional development (p < .001), and professional support (p < .001) and their perceived levels of personal RTI implementation. The findings of the current research will be used to help school leaders better understand which RTI implementation factors teachers' perceive as being the most significant barriers to their implementation efforts in the classroom. The results will give administrators the knowledge they need to offer assistance to teachers in the areas identified as barriers so that RTI can be implemented in order to help all children learn at high levels.

Although the implementation of the Common Core State Standards has included more informational texts in early grades to emphasize reading to gain knowledge (Green, 2012; Roskos & Neuman, 2014), the lack of available expository assessments leaves teachers unsure of what students need to know in order to be successful comprehenders of these texts (Hall, Markham, & Culatta, 2005; Harding, 2014). Moreover, there are very few early expository assessments available which makes it difficult for teachers to monitor young children's expository text knowledge and skills and then adjust their instruction to meet children's unique needs. The EECA R-2 is an early expository assessment measure that was created in order to meet these demands. Data from 128 preschoolers between the ages of four and five in seven different Title I classrooms were collected to determine the reliability and validity of the EECA R-2. Children were given the Test of Story Comprehension (TSC) subtest of the Narrative Language Measures (NLM) Preschool Assessment as well as two versions of the EECA R-2. A Many Facets Rasch model was used to determine reliability and to allow for examination of individual test items. In addition, correlations were run between the NLM and the EECA to determine the validity of the EECA. Results indicate the EECA R-2 is a reliable and valid measure. High reliability was obtained for all facets (rater .00, person .97, and form .96). Items 6-13, 15, 18, and 23 were deemed quality items. Items 1, 2, 5, 15, 16, 20, 21, 25, and 26 were deemed problematic items. There was a positive correlation between the TSC subtest of the NLM Preschool Assessment and the EECA R-2 tasks (r=.76, p= ≤.01). Future research could include another rendition of the EECA in order to gain a better understanding of the problematic items. Doing so could support teachers in assessing student abilities and preparing classroom instruction that targets specific areas of focus to move learning to higher levels.

Statement of the problem: The problem had two parts. The first of these was to ascertain and record the types of professional activities of the teachers and the approximate time spent on these activities according to the teachers' years of service in the Stockton Unified School District. The second was to analyze the resultant data to determine if any significant patterns of performance existed.

In this study, the role of the deputy-principal is examined. An attempt is made to gain a better understanding on how distributed leadership manifests in the role of the primary school deputy-principal by focusing on the deputy-principal’s activities and interactions with, among others, the Department of Basic Education (DBE), the principal, educators, the School Governing Body (SGB) and the community. A deputyprincipal is in the unique position of being not only the assistant to the principal and deputising for the principal during his or her absence, but also a teaching staff member. Education leadership literature shows that little attention has been given to the specific duties and responsibilities of South African deputy-principals in comparison to other leadership and management positions in schools. Due to the vaguely defined position of deputy-principals, their role and responsibilities remain largely undetermined. By posing the central research question to the study: “How is distributed leadership manifested in the role of the primary school deputy-principals?” the aim was to determine what primary school deputy-principals do on a daily basis at school, what the different perspectives are on the role and responsibilities of the deputy-principal with regard to school management and leadership, and also who determines what the primary school deputy-principal does and what criteria are used to determine these duties. Purposive sampling was used, selecting five large primary schools in the Tshwane South District of the Gauteng Department of Education (GDE). / Dissertation (MEd)--University of Pretoria, 2019. / Education Management and Policy Studies / MEd / Unrestricted

No description available.

No description available.