Languages Other Than English Teacher Preparation In .

2y ago
16 Views
2 Downloads
619.00 KB
51 Pages
Last View : 16d ago
Last Download : 2m ago
Upload by : Jerry Bolanos
Transcription

Languages Other than English Teacher Preparation inCalifornia:Standards of Quality and Effectiveness forSubject Matter ProgramsAmerican Sign LanguageA Handbook forTeacher Educators&Program Reviewers

Languages Other than English Teacher Preparation inCalifornia:Standards of Quality and Effectiveness forSubject Matter ProgramsAmerican Sign LanguageBased on and Adapted from the Standards of Quality and Effectiveness forLanguages Other Than English Teacher Preparation developed by theLanguages Other than English Subject Matter Advisory Panel(2003-2004)2004-2005Adopted and Implemented by theCalifornia Commission on Teacher CredentialingState of California1900 Capitol AvenueSacramento, California 958142005(Revised September 2010)

California Commission on Teacher CredentialingArnold Schwarzenegger, GovernorState of California2004Commission MembersLawrence Madkins, ChairElaine C. Johnson, Vice-ChairKristen BecknerBeth HaukSteve LillyLeslie LittmanOs-Maun RasulAlberto VacaTeacherPublic RepresentativeTeacherTeacherFaculty MemberDesignee, Office of the Superintendent ofPublic InstructNon-Administrative Service Credential HolderTeacherEx-Officio RepresentativesKaren Symms GallagherAthena WaiteSara LundquistBill WilsonAssociation of Independent CaliforniaColleges and UniversitiesRegents, University of CaliforniaCalifornia Postsecondary EducationCommissionCalifornia State UniversityExecutive OfficersSam W. SwoffordBeth GraybillLawrence BirchExecutive DirectorDirector, Professional Services DivisionAdministrator, Program Evaluation

The Languages Other than English (LOTE) Teacher Subject MatterAdvisory PanelCalifornia Commission on Teacher Credentialing2003-04PanelistsProfessional PositionsMary GautreauTeacher of LOTEChristine LanphereDede MousseauTeacher of LOTEProfessor of LOTEEducational OrganizationsRetiredNatomas High SchoolState Center Community CollegeIlse DalyProfessor of LOTECalifornia State University, Monterey BayMarjorie TussingProfessor of LOTECalifornia State University, FullertonHiroko KataokaTeacher of LOTECalifornia State University, Long BeachSachiko MatsunagaProfessor of LOTECalifornia State University, Los AngelesYoshiko Saito-AbbottProfessor of LOTECalifornia State University, Monterey BaySetsue ShibataProfessor of LOTECalifornia State University, FullertonGrace ChiTeacher of LOTESunny Hills High SchoolKijoo KoProfessor of LOTEUniversity of California, BerkeleyMay SuTeacher of LOTEDefense Language InstituteEugenia ChaoTeacher of LOTECerritos High SchoolManjit JhuttiTeacher of LOTELuther Elementary SchoolNatalie CollinsTeacher of LOTEPrivate InstructionNina StankousProfessor of LOTEInterAmerican CollegeE. Dale CarterProfessor of LOTECalifornia State University, Los AngelesDuarte SilvaProfessor of LOTEStanford UniversityFidalgo Von SchmidtProfessor of LOTECalifornia State University, FullertonChi PhamProfessor of LOTEEvergreen Valley CollegeKim-Oanh Nguyen-LamProfessor of LOTECalifornia State University, Long BeachCommission Consultants to the Advisory Panel:Susan Porter

The Languages Other than English (LOTE) Teacher Subject MatterAdvisory PanelAmerican Sign LanguageCalifornia Commission on Teacher Credentialing2004-05PanelistsProfessional PositionsEducational OrganizationsLawrence FleischerProfessor of ASLCalifornia State University, NorthridgeMargo CienikTom HumphriesSusannah KirchnerMala KleinfeldSandra Lee KloppingTeacher of ASLProfessor of ASLTeacher of ASL (ret.)Interpreter of ASLProfessor of ASLSouth Hill High SchoolUniversity of California, San DiegoBurbank High SchoolUniversity of California, San DiegoOhlone Community CollegeMarlon KuntzeChristine LanpherePatty LessardCindy ShieldsColleen SmithJanet MaxwellProfessor of ASLTeacher of LOTEInterpreter of ASLTeacher of ASLProfessor of ASLInterpreter of ASLSan Jose State UniversityNatomas High SchoolHuntington Beach High SchoolSan Diego State UniversityCommission Consultants to the Advisory Panel:Mark McLean, Phyllis Jacobson

Languages Other than English Teacher Preparation in California:Standards of Quality and Effectiveness forSubject Matter ProgramsTable of ContentsPart 1: Introduction to Languages Other than English Teaching StandardsStandards for the Preparation of Teachers of Languages Other than English: A Foreword by theCalifornia Commission on Teacher Credentialing. 1Standards of Program Quality and Effectiveness . 2Standards for Professional Teacher Preparation Programs . 3Subject Matter Preparation Programs for Prospective Teachers . 4Subject Matter Advisory Panels . 4Essential Documents for Panel Use . 5Field Review Survey . 6The Languages Other than English Teaching Credential. 7Alignment of Program Standards and Performance Assessments . 6New Subject Matter Assessments . 8Overview of the Languages Other than English Standards Handbook . 8Contributions of the Languages Other than English Advisory Panel . 8Requests for Assistance from Handbook Users . 9Part 2: Standards of Program Quality in Languages Other than EnglishDefinitions of Key Terms. 10Preconditions for the Approval of Subject Matter Programs in Languages Other than English . 12Category I: Standards Common to All Single Subject Matter Preparation Programs . 13Standard 1Program Design . 13Standard 2Program Resources and Support . 13Category II: Program Standards . 14Standard3 Program Philosophy and Purpose . 14Standard4 Nature of Language . 15Standard5 Linguistics of the Target Language . 16Standard6 Literary and Cultural Texts and Traditions . 17Standard7 Cultural Analysis and Comparison . 18Standard8 Language and Communications: Receptive Comprehension. 19Standard9 Language and Communications: Expressive Production . 20Standard 10 Connections to Other Disciplines and Language Communities. 21Subject Matter Requirements for Prospective Teachers of Languages Other than EnglishPart I: Content Domains for Subject Matter Understanding and Skill in Languages Other thanEnglish: American Sign Language . 22Domain 1. General Linguistics . 22

Domain 2.Domain 3.Domain 4.Domain 5.Domain 6.Linguistics of the Target Language. 24Literary and Cultural Texts and Traditions . 25Cultural Analysis and Comparison. 26Language and Communications: Receptive Comprehension . 28Language and Communications: Expressive Production . 29Part 3: Implementation of Program Quality Standards for Subject Matter PreparationReview and Improvement of Subject Matter Standards. 31Technical Assistance for Program Sponsors. 31Review and Approval of Subject Matter Programs . 31Submission Guidelines for Single Subject Matter Program Documents . 33Transmittal Instructions. 33Submission Deadlines . 34Transmittal Documents . 34Blended Programs . 34Responding to the Standards . 34Packaging a Submission for Shipment to the Commission. 36Intent to Submit a Program Response Form . 37Transmittal Cover Sheet Form . 39Appendix A: Assembly Bill 537 (Education Code Chapter 587, Statutes of 1999) . 41

Part 1: Introduction to Languages Other than English Teaching StandardsStandards and Credentials for Teachers of Languages Other than English: A Foreword bythe California Commission on Teacher CredentialingOne of the purposes of education is to enable students to learn the important subjects of the schoolcurriculum to further their professional goals and to function effectively in work, society and familylife. Each year in California, thousands of students enroll in classes for languages Other than Englishwith teachers who are certified by the Commission on Teacher Credentialing to teach those classesin public schools. The extent to which students learn to engage creatively in languages other thanEnglish and respond critically to languages other than English depends substantially on thepreparation of their teachers in languages other than English and the teaching of languages other thanEnglish.The Commission is the agency of California government that licenses teachers and other professionalswho serve in the public schools. As the policy-making body that establishes and maintains standardsfor the education profession in the state, the Commission is concerned with the quality andeffectiveness of the preparation of teachers and other school practitioners. On behalf of the educationprofession and the general public, one of the Commission’s most important responsibilities is toestablish and implement strong, effective standards of quality for the preparation and assessment ofcredential candidates.California teacher candidates are required to demonstrate competence in the subject matter they willbe authorized to teach. Candidates for the Single Subject Teaching Credential have two optionsavailable for satisfying this requirement. They can either complete a Commission-approved subjectmatter preparation program or they can pass the appropriate Commission-adopted subject matterexamination(s) (Education Code Sections 44280 and 44310). Because they satisfy the samerequirement, these two options are to be as aligned and congruent as possible.The substance and relevance of the single subject matter program standards and the validity ofexamination specifications (subject matter requirements) is not permanent, however. The periodicreconsideration of subject matter program standards and the need for periodic validity studies arerelated directly to one of the Commission’s fundamental missions to provide a strong assurance thatteaching credentials issued by the Commission are awarded to individuals who have the knowledge,skills, and abilities that are needed in order to succeed in public school teaching positions inCalifornia. Best professional practice related to the program standards and the legal defensibility ofthe examination specifications require that the standards and specifications be periodically reviewedand rewritten, as job requirements and expectations change over time (Ed Code 44225i,j, 44257,44288).In the early 1990s, CTC developed and adopted (a) standards for single subject matter preparationprograms and, at the same time, (b) specifications for the single subject matter examinations. Thiswork was based on the advice of subject matter advisory panels and data from validity studies andresulted in program standards and examination specifications (defining the subject matter competencerequirement) that were valid and closely aligned with each other. Those standards and specificationswere adopted by the Commission in 1992 and are still in use today. They are now being replaced bythe newly adopted (2002) subject matter requirements and single subject matter standards.1

Establishing high standards for teachers is based, in part, on three major pieces of legislation. In1988, 1992 and 1998 the Legislature and the governor enacted legislation sponsored by theCommission that strengthened the professional role of the Commission and enhanced its authority toestablish rigorous standards for the preparation and assessment of prospective teachers. These reformlaws were Senate Bills 148 (1988), 1422 (1992) Bergeson, and 2042 (Alpert/Mazzoni, Chapter 548,Statutes of 1998). As a result, the Commission has taken on new responsibilities for establishing highand acceptable levels of quality in teacher preparation and of competence among beginning teachers.To implement these three statutes, CTC has developed new standards, subject matter requirementsand other policies collaboratively with representatives of post-secondary institutions, teachers andadministrators in public schools, and statewide leaders involved in public education.The State Board of Education adopted academic content standards and/or frameworks for CaliforniaK-12 students. These standards have direct implications for the subject matter competencerequirement of prospective teachers. Senate Bill 2042 (Alpert/Mazzoni, Chapter 548, Statutes of1998) addresses the need to require the Commission to ensure that subject matter program standardsand examinations are aligned with the K-12 student content adopted by the State Board of Education.The Commission appointed four panels in 2003 (art, languages other than English, music and physicaleducation) to begin the second of three phases to meet the SB 2042 mandate for single subject matterprograms. The third phase (agriculture, business, health, home economics, and industrial andtechnology education) brings all 13 subject matter areas for credentials into alignment with K-12student content standards by 2005. In addition, the third phase of development included a separatelanguages other than English panel for American Sign Language (ASL), in recognition of the uniquecharacteristics of ASL subject matter preparation. The first phase of single subject matter (English,mathematics, science and social science) panels (2001, 2002) spent considerable time to ensure thatthe new subject matter standards were grounded in, and aligned with, the academic content standardsfor California K-12 students. The second and third phases of panels followed the same process foralignment.Standards of Program Quality and EffectivenessOver the past 15 years CTC has thoroughly redesigned its policies regarding the preparation ofeducation professionals and the review of preparation programs in colleges and universities. Ininitiating these reforms, the Commission adopted the following principles regarding the governanceof educator preparation programs. The Commission asked the Single Subject Panels to apply thesegeneral principles to the creation of standards for single subject matter programs.1) The status of teacher preparation programs in colleges and universities should be determinedon the basis of standards that relate to significant aspects of the quality of those programs.2) There are many ways in which a teacher preparation program could be excellent.3) The curriculum of teacher education plays a central role in a program's quality.4) Teacher education programs should prepare candidates to teach the public school curriculumeffectively.5) In California's public schools, the student population is so diverse that the preparation ofeducators to teach culturally diverse students cannot be the exclusive responsibility ofprofessional preparation programs in schools of education.2

6) The curriculum of a teacher education program should be based on an explicit statement ofpurpose and philosophy. An excellent program also includes student services and policiessuch as advisement services and admission policies.7) The Commission is concerned about the high level of attrition among beginning teachers, andhas successfully sponsored legislation to improve the conditions in which new teachers work.8) The assessment of each student's attainments in a teacher education program is a significantresponsibility of the institution that offers the program.9) The Commission’s standards of program quality allow quality to assume different forms indifferent environments.10) The Commission's standards of program quality are roughly equivalent in breadth andimportance.11) Whether a particular program fulfills the Commission's standards is a judgment that is madeby professionals who have been trained in interpreting the standards.The Commission fulfills one of its responsibilities to the public and the profession by adopting andimplementing standards of program quality and effectiveness. While assuring the public that educatorpreparation is excellent, the Commission respects the considered judgments of educationalinstitutions and professional educators and holds educators accountable for excellence. The premisesand principles outlined above reflect the Commission's approach to fulfilling its responsibilities underthe law.Standards for Professional Teacher Preparation ProgramsThe effectiveness of the languages other than English curriculum in California schools does notdepend entirely on the content knowledge of teachers of languages other than English. Anothercritical factor is the teachers' ability to teach languages other than English. To address thepedagogical knowledge and effectiveness of teachers of languages other than English, theCommission in September 1998 launched an extensive standards and assessment reform that led tothe development of new teacher preparation standards. In January 2004, CTC authorized an extensivefield review of the draft standards for languages other than English. During spring 2004, the standardswere amended, based on field review findings and direction from the Commission, and finallyadopted by the Commission in May 2004.The advisory panel that developed the standards was charged with developing the following threepolicy documents for review and consideration by the Commission: New standards of quality and effectiveness for professional teacher preparation programs.Teaching Performance Expectations that would serve as the basis for evaluating thecompetence of teacher candidates on teaching performance assessments embedded inpreparation programs.Ne

California State University, Long Beach : Commission Consultants to the Advisory Panel: Susan Porter _ The Languages Other than English (LOTE) Teacher Subject Matter Advisory Panel American Sign Language ; California Commission on Teacher Credentialing 2004-05 . Panelists Professional Positions .

Related Documents:

1 Languages at Harvard 2014 – 2015 Why Study a Foreign Language? 2 Planning Your Language Study 5 Languages Offered 2014-2015 (by Department) 6 African Languages 7 Celtic Languages 9 Classical Languages 10 East Asian Languages 11 English 17 Germanic Languages 17 Linguistics 20 Near Eastern Languages 21 Romance La

Languages English, Amerindian dialects, Creole, Hindi, Urdu Haiti 163 GMT Languages French, Creole Hong Kong 163 GMT 8 Languages Cantonese, English, Mandarin Hungary 167 . Jamaica 190 GMT -5 Languages English, Jamaican Creole Japan 191 GMT 9 Languages Japanese Jordan 193 GMT 3 Languages Arabic, English Kazakhstan 194 GMT 6

World Languages and English as a Second Language Indiana's Academic Standards for World Languages are designed to guide instruction in world languages including commonly and less-commonly taught languages, heritage languages, and classical languages. A separate set of WIDA English language development (ELD) standards

5007000 PreK – 5 World Languages French-Elementary 2012 and beyond 5007020 PreK – 5 World Languages Spanish-Elementary 2012 and beyond 0701000 6 – 8 World Languages M/J French, Beginning 2013 and beyond 0701010 6 – 8 World Languages M/J French, Intermediate 2013 and beyond 0701020 6 – 8 World Languages M/J French, Advanced 2013 and .

Applications of traditional scripting languages are: 1. system administration, 2. experimental programming, 3. controlling applications. Application areas : Four main usage areas for scripting languages: 1. Command scripting languages 2.Application scripting languages 3.Markup language 4. Universal scripting languages 1.

-graphical programming languages PLC ladder diagram Classification according to programming language paradigm -procedural programming languages C, Ada83 -functional programming languages LISP -logical programming languages PROLOG -object-oriented programming languages C , Smalltalk, Ada95 Classification according to language level

Title: Std. 5th Perfect English Balbharati Workbook, English Medium (MH Board) Author: Target Publications Subject: English Balbharati Keywords: 5th std books maharashtra board, fifth standard english medium maharashtra board, 5th std english book, 5th std english digest, 5th std english lessons, std v english book, 5th standard english guide maharashtra b

American Revolution, students are exposed to academic, domain-specific vocabulary and the names and brief descriptions of key events. Lesson 2 is a simulation in which the “Royal Tax Commissioners” stamp all papers written by students and force them to pay a “tax” or imprisonment.