Advanced instructional strategies



Download 140.5 Kb.
Page1/2
Date02.02.2019
Size140.5 Kb.
#79514
  1   2



JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY

SCHOOL OF EDUCATION


ADVANCED INSTRUCTIONAL STRATEGIES


COURSE 881.622 SECTION 61
Course Instructor:

Maurice B. Howard, Ph.D.

Phone: 410-838-8428

FAX: 410-838-6967

E-Mail: MBH1242@aol.com.

Address: 7 Trenton Lane, Bel Air, MD 21014-5517


Course Dates, Times, Site, and Credits:

Fall Semester, 2007

Monday, September 10, 2007, through December 17, 2007

4:30 – 6:30 P.M., Columbia Campus


Index of Syllabus Contents

TOPIC PAGE

Overview……………………………………………………………………..…………...….1

ISLLC Standards Covered………………………………………………………...……….2

Objectives and Competencies……………………………………………………………..2

Texts and Materials for Course……………………………………………………………3

Students with Disabilities….……………………………………………………………….3

Course Outline and Schedule….………………………………………………………….3

Description of Course Assignments………………………………………………………6


Course Evaluation Components………………………………………………………..…7


Scoring Rubrics for Assignments………………………………………………………....8

Annotated Bibliography……………………………………………………………………12

Internet Resources………………………………………………………………………...15

Sample Bibliographical Entries………………………..……………………..…………..15

Knowing Howard’s Writing Preferences………………………………………..……….17

How to Write “Good”…………………...………………………………………………....18


Overview of Course Activities
In Advanced Instructional Strategies, participants will review current, research-driven effective instructional strategies, techniques, and practices. After exploring constructivist theory, participants will concentrate on how multi-modal and multi-dimensional (authentic) instructional techniques may be integrated and applied in educational settings. Each participant will practice identifying and using the components of multi-modal and multi-dimensional teaching in instructional planning. Each participant will develop an (or adapt an existing) observation form for critiquing the effectiveness of classroom instruction and use that form to prepare a critique of a personally-delivered demonstration lesson that has been videotaped as it was taught to the class. Each participant will select (an) instructional strategy (ies) and prepare a paper with specifics about the selected strategy(ies).
Primary ISLLC Standard for School Leaders Addressed in the Course
Standard 2: A school leader is an educational leader who promotes the success of all students by advocating, nurturing, and sustaining a school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning and staff professional growth. (Knowledge: Applied learning theories; applied motivational theories; curriculum design, implementation, evaluation, and refinement; principles of effective instruction; diversity and its meaning for educational programs.)
Course Objectives and Competencies
Through course activities and individual preparation, participants will:
1. Research, iterate, and discuss the historical background of and current

thought about instruction, concentrating on multi-modal teaching and

multi-dimensional (authentic) learning as extensions of constructivist learning theory.

2. Interview educators to identify current instructional techniques in use and

considered best practice for use with today’s students.

3. Select one or more instructional strategies (depending upon complexity of

each strategy) related to constructivist, multi-modal and/or multi-dimensional

(authentic) teaching, then research, discuss and describe each in writing,

and practice.


  1. Analyze instruction for use of constructivist theory as well as components of

multi-modal and multi-dimensional instructional strategies.

5. Develop an observation/evaluation form and use that form to critique

instructional strategies.

6. Demonstrate a selected instructional strategy for the class.

7. Critique a videotape of the strategy demonstrated for the class.
In addition to the increased knowledge of instructional strategies, course participants will become more competent in their ability to:
1. Paraphrase and apply current thought on instruction.

2. Identify current instructional strategies for potential use.

3. Differentiate the component parts of selected instructional strategies.

4. Envision the classroom setting, teacher functions, student experiences,

and logistical specifics necessary for the strategy to be implemented.

5. Envision student behaviors associated with successful implementation of

selected instructional strategies.

6. Evaluate the utility of instructional strategies, applying a set of standards in

observational experiences.

7. Demonstrate individual transfer of new knowledge of instructional methods.

Students with Disabilities: If you are a student with a documented disability who requires an academic adjustment, auxiliary aid, or similar accommodation, please contact Jennifer Smith in the Disability Services office at 410-516-9728 or via E-mail at onestop.disability@jhu.edu.
Texts and Materials for the Course
Required Reading:
Armstrong, T. (2000). Multiple intelligences in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.


Brooks, J. G. & Brooks, M. G. (1999). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist

classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Silberman, M. (1996). Active learning: 101 strategies to teach any subject.

Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.



Required Materials: 1 Blank 60-minute 1” videotape for use in videotaping demonstration.

Course Outline and Schedule (The course schedule and topics will be adjusted as necessary to accommodate the size, prior knowledge, and needs of the class.)

Note: In the event of bad weather, please listen to your local radio station for college class cancellations. Calls for information may be made to 1-800-548-9004.
September 10, 2007

Introduction:

Overview of Course, Syllabus, Assignments, Due Dates, Rubrics, Etc.


Discussion Topic: Personal Teaching and Learning Preferences
*Assignment for September 17: Read Brooks and Brooks, pp. 1-

127; Reread Brooks and Brooks, pp. 101-118.
September 17, 2007

Discussion Topic: Understanding Constructivism
*Assignment for September 24: Read Armstrong, pp. 1-38 and 51-

66.
Go to: http://glossary.plasma link.com/glossary.html#R and peruse the

instructional strategies on this important site.
Prepare Article/Chapter/Tape Summary #1.
September 24, 2007--Article/Chapter/Tape Summary Due

Discussion Topics: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences; Identifying

Intelligences; Integrating Multi-modal and Multi-dimensional Concepts


*Assignment for October 1: Conduct and prepare a written summary

of interviews with 3 educators on current instructional strategies they

use. (In addition to the specific instructions for the interview, Brown,

pp.18-21 and Armstrong, pp. 51-66 may provide useful content to aid in

the interview.)
October 1, 2007—Educator Interview Summaries Due

Discussion Topic: A Summary of Interview Findings: Educator Views on

Currently Used Instructional Strategies


*Assignment for October 8: Read Armstrong, pp. 38-50 and 67-87.
Go to: Run out and read http://www.mcrel.org/dimensions/whathow.asp.
October 8, 2007

Discussion Topic: Exploring and Incorporating Multi-modal Instructional

Strategies with Instructional Snippets


*Assignment for October 15: Read Armstrong, pp. 88-120.
Finalize observation form.
October 15, 2007—Observation Form Due

Discussion Topic: Observing the Integration of Multi-modal and

Multi-dimensional Teaching Strategies


*Assignment for October 22: Review notes and readings in preparation for the

Mid-Term Examination.

October 22, 2007—Mid-Term Examination

*Assignments for October 29: Read Armstrong, pp.121-140; Note

Appendix C for lesson Prepare for Instructional Strategy

Demonstration (first fifth of class will present); Prepare a written

critique of instructional strategy demonstration to be submitted the class session after your demonstration with the completed observation form.

October 29, 2007

Discussion Topic: Instructional Strategy Demonstrations (first sixth of class

will present)


*Assignments for November 5: Work on your Web Lesson Analysis; Prepare for

Strategy Demonstration (second sixth of class will present; Prepare a written critique of strategy demonstration to be submitted the class session after your demonstration with the completed observation form.
November 5, 2007

Discussion Topic: Instructional Strategy Demonstrations (second sixth of class

will present)


*Assignments for November 12: Complete your Web Lesson Analysis; Prepare

for Strategy Demonstration (third sixth of class will present); Prepare a

written critique of strategy demonstration to be submitted the class session after your demonstration with the completed observation form.
November 12, 2007—Web Analysis Lesson Due

Discussion Topic: Instructional Strategy Demonstrations (third sixth of class

will present)


*Assignments for November 19: Prepare for Strategy Demonstration(fourth sixth

of class will present); Prepare a written critique of strategy demonstration to be submitted the class session after your demonstration with the completed observation form.
November 19, 2007

Discussion Topic: Instructional Strategy Demonstrations (fourth sixth of class

will present)


*Assignments for November 26: Prepare for Strategy Demonstration (fifth sixth

of class will present); Prepare a written critique of strategy demonstration

to be submitted the class session after your demonstration with the completed observation form.
November 26, 2007

Discussion Topic: Multi-modal and Multi-dimensional Teaching with

Special Populations; Instructional Strategy Demonstrations (fifth sixfth of

class will present)
*Assignments for December 3: Prepare for Strategy Demonstration (final

sixth of class will present); Prepare a written critique of strategy

demonstration to be submitted the class session after your demonstration with the completed observation form.
December 3, 2007

Discussion Topic: Multi-modal and Multi-dimensional Teaching with

Special Populations; Instructional Strategy Demonstrations (final sixth of

class will present)
*Assignments for December 10: Finalize paper and be ready to present its

major points orally to the class. See presentation rubrics for assistance.

Prepare for Instructional Strategy Demonstration (final fifth of class will present); Prepare a written critique of instructional strategy demonstration to be submitted the class session after your demonstration; Work on

paper. See paper assessment rubrics for assistance.
December 10, 2007--Paper Due

Discussion Topic: Cough It Up: Oral Presentations of Papers on Strategies;

Make-up Date for Demonstrations


*Assignments for December 17: Review course notes and materials;

Prepare to discuss what has been learned; Prepare to prognosticate.

December 17, 2007

Discussion Topic: Make-up Date; Celebration; Applying Multi-

Intelligence Theory; Return of Papers; Evaluation of Course.


DESCRIPTIONS OF COURSE ASSIGNMENTS
1. SUMMARY OF ONE ARTICLE/CHAPTER/TAPE: Select an article from educational periodicals, chapters of educational books, or educational audio/video tapes that highlight instructional strategies with which you are NOT familiar OR that you have NOT used in your classroom. Summarize it in writing, giving the bibliographical information (use APA style), indicating the specifics of the strategy, and concluding the potential of the strategy for use in your personal menu of instructional strategies. Each summary should be no more than 1-2 double-spaced pages. The bibliography attached to the course syllabus may help in selecting materials to read.
2. INTERVIEW: Choose 3 educators, one with over 20 years of experience, one with over 10 years of experience, and one with less than 10 years of experience. Interview these three educators, using as a minimum the following questions, and summarizing their responses in writing to EACH question (PLEASE do not identify the teacher by name in your written summary; introduce the teacher by grade level[s], subject[s], and type of school):

a. How would you characterize the students you teach (such as gifted,

special population, college bound, etc.)?

b. What instructional methods or strategies do you predominantly use in

your instruction with these students?

c. What instructional methods or strategies result in the greatest student

excitement, cooperation, or prolonged interest?

d. What instructional methods or strategies do you think best prepare

students for success on state assessments (for Maryland public school

teachers) and/or for the standardized assessments used in your school (for all

teachers)?

e. What instructional methods or strategies do you use to make students

think about and apply their learning?


  1. What percent of your students are computer literate? What percentage of your students have

access to a computer at home?

g. How frequently must you shift lesson activities to keep students involved in your lesson

(specify in minutes; e.g, I must shift activities every 10 minutes)?

h. How have your teaching methods changed over the span of your career?


3. PAPER: Select an instructional strategy related to multi-modal and/or multi-dimensional (authentic) teaching that you have NOT used but that seems promising for use in your educational setting. After summarizing the strategy, its relationship to constructivist learning theory, and its components, summarize its historical background and proponents, its research base, its use by practitioners, etc. Your paper should be no more than 3-5 double-spaced pages. The strategy you chose for the paper should NOT be the same as the strategy you demonstrate for the class but may be a strategy you discovered when reading articles, chapters, or perusing tapes for the class.
4. OBSERVATION FORM: Design a classroom observation form (or adapt the form used in your school system) in which you integrate specific components of multi-modal and multi-dimensional (authentic) teaching within the reporting rubrics of the form. You should include a listing of the principles of Constructivism, a listing of the five Dimensions of Learning, and a listing of the Multiple Intelligences with space for notating “enabled” versus. “prompted.” You will be using this observation form when viewing a videotaped lesson and when preparing the critique of your instructional strategy demonstration video. (Forms, lists, and charts from Armstrong and Brown (pp. 122-124) will provide useful information as you design or adapt your observation form.)
5. WEB LESSON ANALYSIS: Log on to one of the following sites (or choose another site that features lesson plans). Find a potential lesson for your subject area and learning level and make a copy of it. Analyze the lesson for elements of constructivism, use of multiple intelligences, and the dimension(s) of learning in evidence in lesson activities. If none are readily available, determine ways that lesson activities might be modified to include constructivism, multiple intelligences, and the dimensions of learning.
Summarize your findings in a 1-2 page, double-spaced paper, and attach a copy of the lesson with your findings. Possible sites include:

www.scholastic.com

www.4teachers.org

www.Discoveryschool.com

www.Education-world.com

www.educast.com/html

www.lightspan.com

http://teachervision.com

www.teachers-connect.net

www.col-ed.org/cur/

www.theteacherscorner.net

www.education-world.com

http://ericir.syr.edu

www.alfy.com/teachers/teach/lesson_builder

www.lessonplanspage.com

www.teachers.net

www.askeric.org/cgi-bin/printlessons.cgi
6. DEMONSTRATION: Select an instructional strategy that incorporates constructivist learning theory and that is or may be related to multi-modal and/or multi-dimensional (authentic) teaching and learning. Prepare a demonstration of the strategy in a teaching simulation. The demonstration will be made to the class, which will serve as your students for the demonstration. The demonstration will be videotaped. Prepare a one-page how-to description of your strategy, which you should distribute after the demonstration.
7. CRITIQUE OF LESSON/STRATEGY: Using the observation form you developed and your videotaped demonstration of an instructional strategy, prepare a written critique in which you assess the extent to which multi-modal and multi-dimensional teaching were in place. Your critique will consist of 1) the completed observation form, 2) a short written summary of your findings, and 3) a list of follow-up suggestions for follow-up actions or next steps in refining your use of the instructional strategy (Review the illustrations/appendices from Brown.)

Course Evaluation Components
The grade for the course will be determined by quality of the participant’s:

--written summary of article or chapter or video/audio tape from

professional education periodicals or sources (15 points),

--written summary of interviews with three educators (25 points),

--observation form applying constructivist theory, multi-modal, and multi-

dimensional criteria (15 points),

--mid-term examination (25 points)

--web lesson analysis (15 points)

--paper about a selected instructional strategy (25 points)

--demonstration of an effective instructional technique or strategy (25

points),

--critique of personal videotaped instructional strategy using observation

form (20 points),

--attendance and contributions to class activities (10 points; five points

deducted per absence; three points deducted for any late paper or

product).


Points indicated for each evaluation component will reflect the evaluation of the extent to which the assignment was completed and the quality of the product. Points will be deducted for components that are late. Rubrics are provided for scoring of all evaluation components. The following grading scale will be used to determine a final grade for the course:
A (175-166 points)

A- (165-158 points)

B+ (157-150 points)

B (149-145 points)

B- (144-140 points)

C+ (139-137 points)

C (136-131 points)

C- (130-122 points)

F (Below 122).
Scoring Rubrics for Assignments
1. Rubrics for Scoring the Article/Chapter/Tape Summary
15-13 All of the following were noted:

The instructional strategy addressed related to constructivist learning

theory, multi-modal teaching, or multi-dimensional teaching.

Bibliographical information followed the APA format.

A succinct summary provided sufficient information to understand the

intent of the article/chapter/tape.

Use of the language was accurate.

The article was submitted on time.


12+-10 One or more of the following was (were) noted:

The instructional strategy addressed did not relate to constructivist

learning theory, multi-modal teaching, or multi-dimensional teaching.

Bibliographical information was inadequate or not in the APA format.

The summary was vague and provided insufficient information to

understand the intent of the article/chapter/tape.

Use of the language was inaccurate.

The article was submitted late.


2. Rubrics for Scoring the Interview
25-23 All of the following were noted:

Three educators were interviewed with the specified years of experience.

All specified questions were asked of each teacher interviewed.

A summary of responses for each question was given.

Observations about the responses of teachers were provided.

Use of the language was accurate.

The interview summaries were submitted on time and the interviewer

contributed to the class discussion of the interview results.



22+-20 One or more of the following was (were) noted:

Not all of the specified educators with years of experience were

interviewed.

Not all of the questions were addressed.

The summarized responses were not complete or did not communicate

fully.


Observations about the responses of teachers were inadequate or not

provided.

Use of language was good but not consistently accurate.

The interview summary was submitted late and/or the interviewer

did not contribute to the class discussion of the interview results.
19+-16 Two or more of the following were noted:

Not all of the specified educators were interviewed as assigned.

The years of experience for the educators did not match instructions.

Not all of the assigned questions were not used.

The responses were inadequate and vague.

Use of the language was not accurate.

The interview summary was submitted late and the interviewer did not

contribute to class discussion of the interview results.


3. Rubrics for the Demonstration Lesson
25-22 All of the following were evident:

The instructional strategy clearly related to constructivist learning theory

and integrated aspects of multi-modal and/or multi-dimensional teaching and learning.

Sufficient introductions and concluding comments were given to assure

participant understanding of the learning level, classroom needs, and

subject specifications necessary for comprehension of the

demonstration/presentation.

The instructional strategy was clearly and creatively demonstrated either

on tape or as part of the actual demonstration/presentation.

A succinct handout describing the strategy was provided for class

participants.

Participants were actively involved in the demonstration/presentation.

The presenter used appropriate teaching voice tone, maintained

appropriate eye contact, and/or modeled correct language usage.

The demonstration was provided on the assigned date.
21+-18 Two or more of the following were in evidence:

The instructional strategy related somewhat to constructivist learning

theory and incorporated some multi-modal and/or multi-dimensional teaching and learning.

Some introduction and concluding comments were given to assure

participant understanding of the learning level, classroom needs,

and subject specifications necessary for comprehension of the

demonstration/presentation.

The instructional strategy was partially demonstrated either on tape or

as part of the actual presentation.

A succinct handout describing the strategy was not provided for class

participants.

Participants were somewhat involved in the demonstration/presentation.

The presenter used inappropriate teaching voice tone, does not maintain appropriate eye contact, and/or incorrect language usage.

The demonstration was not provided on the assigned date.


17+-13 Two or more of the following were in evidence:

The instructional strategy did not relate to constructivist learning theory or

did not adequately incorporate multi-modal and/or multi-

dimensional teaching and learning.

No or insufficient introduction and concluding comments were given to

assure participant understanding of the learning level, classroom

needs, and subject specifications necessary for comprehension of the demonstration/presentation

The instructional strategy was not clearly demonstrated either on tape or

as part of the actual presentation.

A succinct summary of the strategy was not provided to class participants.

Participants were not involved in the demonstration/presentation.

The presenter used inappropriate teaching voice tone, does not maintain appropriate eye contact, and/or incorrect language usage.

The demonstration was not provided on the assigned date.
4. Rubrics for the Observation/Evaluation Form
15-13 All of the following were in evidence:

The form as presented was clear and usable.

The form included a list of the principles or the twelve characteristics of

Constructivism and provided a means to recording which were observed.

The form rubrics deliberately and clearly listed the Multiple Intelligences and provided a

means of indicating if each was enabled or prompted.

The form rubrics clearly included references to instruction aimed at each of the

Dimensions of Learning.

Correct conventions of language were consistently applied on the form.

The observation form was submitted on time.


12+-10 Two or more of the following were in evidence:

The form as presented was unclear and not clearly usable.

The form did not include a list of the principles or the twelve characteristics of

Constructivism and provided a means to recording which were observed.

The form rubrics did not deliberately and clearly list the Multiple Intelligences and

provided a means of indicating if each was enabled or prompted.

The form rubrics did not clearly include references to instruction aimed at each of the

Dimensions of Learning.

Correct conventions of language were not consistently applied on the form.

The observation form was submitted late.


5. Rubrics for the Self-Critique of the Demonstration Using the Observation or Evaluation Form
20-18 All of the following were in evidence:

The completed observation/evaluation form for the instructional strategy

demonstration was included.

A short summary of the findings of the self-evaluation was provided and

clearly relates to the appropriate section(s) of the

observation/evaluation form.

Clear follow-up suggestions or actions for refining the personal use of the

instructional strategy were provided.

The self-critique is realistic and demonstrates genuine effort at self-

evaluation of teaching.

Appropriate conventions of language are consistently applied.

The self-critique was submitted on time.


17+-15 Two or more of the following were in evidence:

The completed observation/evaluation form for the instructional strategy

demonstration was included.

A short summary of the findings of the self-evaluation either was not

provided and/or is not based on appropriate sections of the

observation/evaluation form.

Follow-up suggestions or actions for refining the personal use of the

instructional strategy were insufficient to communicate next steps in

use of the strategy.

The self-critique was not realistic or does not demonstrate genuine effort at

self-evaluation of teaching.

Appropriate conventions of language were not consistently applied.

The self-critique was submitted late.
14+-12 Two or more of the following were in evidence:

The completed observation/evaluation form for the instructional strategy

demonstration was not included.

A short summary of the findings of the self-evaluation was not provided

and/or was not based on appropriate sections of the

observation/evaluation form.

Follow-up suggestions or actions for refining the personal use of the

instructional strategy were not provided.

The self-critique was not realistic and/or did not demonstrate genuine

effort at self-evaluation of teaching.

Appropriate conventions of language were not consistently used.

The self-critique was submitted late.


6. Rubrics for Scoring the Analysis of an Internet Lesson Plan
15-13 All of the following were noted:

The lesson analysis clearly addressed constructivist learning

theory, multi-modal teaching, or multi-dimensional teaching.

The analysis clearly demonstrates a working knowledge of constructivism, multi-modal

teaching, and multi-dimensional teaching.

The analysis demonstrates creative lesson planning and adaptation.

Use of the language was accurate.

The analysis was submitted on time.


12+-10 One or more of the following was (were) noted:

The lesson analysis does not relate to constructivist learning theory, multi-modal teaching,

and/or multi-dimensional teaching.

The analysis does not demonstrate a working knowledge of constructivism, multi-modal

teaching, and multi-dimensional teaching.

The lesson analysis does not clearly demonstrate creative lesson planning and adaptation.

Use of the language is inaccurate.

The analysis was submitted late.


7. Rubrics for the Paper
25-22 All of the following were in evidence:

The instructional strategy discussed in the paper clearly related to

constructivist learning theory as well as multi-modal and/or multi-

dimensional teaching and learning.

A sufficient summary of the instructional strategy and its components was

provided to aid reader comprehension.

The historical background and any appropriate proponents of instructional

strategy were succinctly presented.

The research base of the instructional strategy was succinctly presented.

Use of the instructional strategy by practitioners was succinctly but clearly explained.

Correct conventions of written language were consistently used in the paper. Bibliographical information followed the APA format.

The paper was submitted on time.



21+-18 Two or more of the following were in evidence:

The instructional strategy discussed in the paper did not clearly relate to

constructivist learning theory as well as to multi-modal and/or multi-

dimensional teaching and learning.

A summary of the instructional strategy and its components was not

provided OR does not assure reader comprehension.

The historical background and any appropriate proponents of instructional

strategy was not presented.

The research base of the instructional strategy was not presented.

Use of the instructional strategy by practitioners was insufficiently

explained.

Correct conventions of written language were not consistently used in the paper.

Bibliographical information did not follow the APA format.

The paper was submitted late.



17+-13 Two or more of the following were in evidence:

The instructional strategy did not reflect constructivist learning theory.

The instructional strategy discussed in the paper did not clearly relate to

multi-modal and/or multi-dimensional teaching and learning.

A summary of the instructional strategy and its components was not

provided.

The historical background and any appropriate proponents of instructional

strategy was not presented.

The research base of the instructional strategy was not presented.

Use of the instructional strategy by practitioners was not provided.

Correct conventions of written language were not consistently used in the paper.

Bibliographical information did not follow the APA format.

The paper was submitted late.


SUPPLEMENTAL READING: A BIBLIOGRAPHY WITH ANNOTATIONS

Armstrong, T. (1994). Multiple intelligences in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Armstrong, T. (1998). Awakening genius in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision

and Curriculum Development. (Note: This book describes twelve qualities of genius and

generalizes on ways to address the genius in each student.)

Alexander, W. M. (1995). Student-oriented curriculum: Asking the right questions. Columbus, OH:

National Middle School Association.

Berliner, D. C. and Casanova, U. (1993). Putting research to work in your school. New York: NY:

Scholastic, Inc. (This practical book summarizes research on teaching and learning with

examples of programmatic implementation of each finding.)

Blythe, T. & Gardner, H. (1990). A school for all intelligences. Educational Leadership. 47(7),

33-36. (Note: Gardner and Blythe begin to apply the Gardner multiple intelligences

ideas to envision a school structured to facilitate instruction focused on different

intelligences and ways of learning.)

Boyer, E. (1995). The basic school: A community for learning. Ewing, NJ: California Princeton

Fulfillment Services. (Note: Sponsored by the Carnegie Foundation for the

Advancement of Teaching, this book discusses characteristics of the basic school as

envisioned by Boyer. These include shared vision, coherent curriculum, learning climate,

commitment to character. Boyer’s description of the “new school” is worth the reading.)

Brandt, R. (1998). Powerful learning. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum

Development. (Note: Brandt applies the ten characteristics of learning to propose teacher actions

to make learning powerful.)

Brooks, J. G. & Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist



classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Brown, J. L. (1995). Observing dimensions of learning in classrooms and schools. Alexandria,

VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Cawalti, G. (Ed.). (1995). Handbook of research on improving student achievement. Arlington,

VA: Educational Research Service. (Note: Sponsored by the Alliance for Curriculum

Reform, this book is extremely useful in identifying instructional methods and strategies

that are research proven.)

Caine, R. N. & Caine, G. (1991). Making connections: Teaching and the human brain.

Alexandria, VA; Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Caine, R. N. & Caine, G. (1997). Education on the edge of possibility. Alexandria, VA:

Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (Note: Caine and Caine

discuss what they learned as they tried to implement two teaching strategies related to

current brain research.)

Campbell, L., Campbell, B., & Dickinson, D. (1996). Teaching and learning through multiple intelligences.

Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon. (Note; This book suggests instructional strategies for

seven of the eight intelligences.)

Chuska, K. R. (1995). Improving classroom questions: A teacher’s guide to increasing student

motivation, participation, and higher-level thinking. Bloomington, IL: Phi Delta Kappa.

Danielson, C. (1996). Enhancing professional practice: A framework for teaching. Alexandria,

VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (Note: For those who

desire to see how instructional foci fit into the whole of teaching, this book will be of use.)

Gardner, H. (1993). Multiple intelligences: The theory in practice. New York: Basic Books.

(Note: This book provides the latest Gardner thought on his theory of intelligences since

his original Frames of Mind: The Theory of Multiple Intelligences. This book is a series

of papers written by Gardner and associates about implementation of the multiple

intelligences theory. This latest book also includes a good bibliography and list of

consultants.)

Glatthorn, A. A. (1994). Developing a quality curriculum. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (This book is a general introduction to traditional curriculum development with references to approaches for school and classroom

extensions of system curriculum.)

Harmin, M. (1994). Inspiring active learning: A handbook for teachers. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development. (Note: This is a must book for the teacher wanting

additional instructional strategies, some of which will be demonstrated in this course.)

Harris, D. E. and Carr, J.F. (1996). How to use standards in the classroom. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (Note: Though short, this book

provides the latest and best thinking on standards-based approaches to education.)

Hibbard, M. et al. (1996). A teacher’s guide to performance-based learning and assessment.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (Note:

Educator’s in Connecticut’s Pomperang Regional School District 15 describe their

approach to teaching and learning that balances basic instruction with

performance-based learning and assessment.)

Jacobs, H. (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (This book provides, in addition to

definitions and several helpful essays, two examples of interdisciplinary curriculum: a high school

year-long humanities course and a K-6 two-week unit with several topics described (Dinosaurs, space, Thanksgiving, etc.)

Jacobs, H. (1997). Mapping the big picture: Integrating curriculum and assessment, k-12. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Holubec, E. J. (1994). Cooperative learning in the classroom.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Joyce, B. R. and Calhoun, E.F. (1996). Creating learning experiences: The role of instructional theory

and research. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (Note:

The serious student of instructional theory and research will appreciate this practical book on teaching and learning that organizes families of teaching models and discusses each with examples.)

Kendall, J. S. and Marzano, R. J. 1996). Content knowledge: A compendium of standards and benchmarks for k-12 education. Aurora, CO: Mid-Continent Regional Education Laboratory, Inc.

Lewin, L. and Shoemaker, B.J. (1998). Great performances: Creating classroom-based assessment



tasks. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. (Note: This book provides many useful suggestions for creating assessment tasks that effectively measure learning. Many of the suggested assessments can actually become instructional tools.)

Marzano, R. et al. (1992) Dimensions of learning: A teacher’s manual. Aurora, CO: McREL

Institute. (Note: This manual is a must for teachers who are serious about applying the

Dimensions of Learning into actual classroom use.)

Marzano, R. (1992). A different kind of classroom: Teaching with dimensions of learning.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Marzano, R. & Pickering, D. (1995). Designing performance-based curriculum, instruction, and

assessment: Lessons from the field. Front Royal, VA: National Cassette Services, Inc.

(Audio Tape 2-95033W97).

Marzano, R. (2007). The art and science of teaching. Alexandria, VA.: Association for Supervision and

Curriculum Development.

McLaughlin, M. & Talbert, J. (1993). Contexts that matter for teaching and learning. Stanford,

CA: Center for Research on the Context of Secondary School Teaching. (Note: This

helpful monograph briefly discusses the strategic opportunities for meeting the national

goals and the contexts in which those goals might be addressed most successfully.)

Ornstein, A., & Behar, L. (1995). Contemporary issues in curriculum. Boston, MA: Allyn

and Bacon. (Note: Section 2 deals with the current dilemma about curriculum and

teaching; chapters 9 and 10 summarize research on improving teaching and discuss

teaching as art and craft. Section 3 has chapters on motivation, critical thinking,

cooperative learning, and the use of evaluative standards. Section 4 has a very helpful

chapter on the use of technology in teaching and instruction.)

Posner, G. J., and Rudnitsky, A. N. (1994). Course design: A guide to curriculum development for

teachers. Fourth Edition. New York, NY: Longman Publishing Group. (This book is a basic text

in traditional approaches to curriculum development based on intended learning outcomes.)

Reardon, M. (1994). Quantum Learning: Strategies for Student Success. Front Royal, VA:

National Cassette Services, Inc. (Audio Tape 94-4209).

Schubert, W. H. (1998). Curriculum: Perspective, paradigm, and possibility. New York, NY:

Macmillan Publishing Company. (Note: This standard text on curriculum design discusses

curriculum components form four philosophical points of view. The book is a must for any

serious student of curriculum development.)

Short, E. C. (Ed). (1991). Forms of curriculum inquiry. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

(Note: This book of essays thoroughly discusses latest alternative approaches to traditional curriculum development.)

Silver, H. F., Strong, R.W., & Perini, M. J. (2000). So each may learn: Integrating learning styles and

multiple intelligences. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Society for Developmental Education. (1995). Teaching for success: Strengthening



child-centered classrooms. Peterborough, New Hampshire: Society for Developmental

Education, 8th Edition Resource Book.

Sprenger, M. (1999). Learning and memory: The brain in action. Alexandria, VA: Association for

Supervision and Curriculum Development. (Note: Chapters 6 and 7 contain many useful

instructional strategies related to types of memory.)

Sylwester, R. (1995). A celebration of neurons: An educator’s guide to the human brain.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Sylwester, R. (1994). The educational applications of male/female brain differences. Front

Royal, VA: National Cassette Services, Inc. (Tape 94-4216A).

Tomlinson, C. A. (1995). How to differentiate instruction in mixed-ability classrooms. Alexandria,

VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners.

Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.. (Note: Many useful

instructional strategies will be found in chapters 7 and 8.)

Uchida, D., Cetron, M., & McKenzie, F. (1996). Preparing students for the 21st century.

Arlington, VA: American Association of School Administrators. (Note: While this book

focuses on what is needed to prepare students for the next century, the thoughtful reader

will find numerous suggestions about effective schools, curriculum, and instruction.)

Wiggins, G. (1995). Problem-based learning. Front Royal, VA: National Cassette Services, Inc.

(Audio Tape 2-95031W97).

Woods, M. A. (1994). The new vision of the urban learner: From theory to practice. Front Royal,

VA: National Cassette Services, Inc. (Audio Tape 94-4204).

Wright, R. (1997). Blight: An event-based science module. Menlo Park, CA: Addison Wesley

Longman publishing Company, Supplementary Division, Dale Seymour Publications.

(Note: This unit and others on asteroids, earthquakes, floods, the gold rush, hurricanes,

oil spills, torandos, toxic leaks and volcanos exemplify good curriculum documents that

suggest useful applications of multi-modal and multi-dimensional teaching.)

Zemelman, S., Daniels, H., & Hyde, A. (1993). Best practice: New standards for teaching and



learning in America’s schools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. (Note: These best

practices are provided by classroom teachers as ways to renew schools. The ideas are

subject-matter based; each chapter ends with a summary chart of the best practices in

the subject area.)


INTERNET RESOURCES

(Note: These are examples, not endorsements):



GENERAL SITES FOR LESSON PLANS, SITE MAPS, AND IDEAS:
www.scholastic.com

www.4teachers.org

www.Discoveryschool.com

www.Education-world.com

www.educast.com/html

www.lightspan.com

http://teachervision.com

www.col-ed.org/cur/

www.theteacherscorner.net

www.education-world.com

http://ericir.syr.edu
SPECIFIC SUBJECT SITES:
BUSINESS AND CAREERS:

  1. Vineyard Challenge (online, interactive game that incorporates concepts found in farming, business, and marketing. Given some money, the user must purchase a vineyard and grow

crops. The outcome is based on user choices.)

Address: http://www.mccarty.com/vineyard/

2. Young Investor Web Site (money matters and finance for kids)



Address: http://www.younginvestor.com/
ENGLISH/LANGUAGE ARTS:

3. Biography Maker (online, step-by-step process for writing great biographies)



Address: http://www.bham.wednet.edu/bio/biomaker.htm

4. Grammar Lady (questions and answers about grammar)



Address: http://www.grammarlady.com/

5. Learn Vocabulary Syndicate (makes learning vocabulary fun; has puzzles, games, and contests)



Address: http://syndicate.com

6. Name That Book (a student lists favorite books by numerous categories)



Address: http://www.az.com/~dday/books.html

7. Tales of Wonder (folk tales and fairy tales from around the world)



Address: http://itpubs.ucdavis.edu/richard/tales/

8. Virtual Presentation Assistant (online tutorial for improving public speaking skills)



Address: http://www.ukans.edu/cwis/units/coms2/vpa/vpa.htm

9. Writer’s Workshop (assistance with writing grammar and usage, bibliographical style)



Address: http://www.english.uiuc.edu/cws/wworkshop/index.htm
FIELD TRIPS:

  1. Global Learn (web site for a nonprofit company sponsoring live expeditions around the

world; students interact with expedition teams)

Address: http://www.globalearn.org/

11. Virtual Field Trips and Tours (online tours of museums, geographic locations, art galleries, and libraries)



Address: http://www.geog.le.ac.uk/cti/virt.html
FRENCH:

12. French Grammar (by music)



Address: http://www.in.on.ca/~dwhite/etienne/index.html
GAMES AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION:

13. Games Kids Play (rules for children’s games)



Address: http://www.corpcomm.net/~gnieboer/gamehome.htm
GUIDANCE AND COUNSELING:

14. Straight Talk about Schools (helps students discuss school issues, define goals for life, etc.)



Address: http://www.balancenet.org/
HEALTH AND SAFETY:

15. Follow the Rules, Get Safely to School (lessons on school bus safety)



Address: http://www.education-world.com/a_lesson/lesson022.shtml

16. Kid’s Health (resources to address health issues for children, parents, teachers, etc.)



Address: http://KidsHealth.org/index2.html
HOME AND FAMILY:

17. Aunt Edna’s Kitchen (nutrition, recipes, weights, measures, and conversion tables)



Address: http://www.cei.net/~terry/auntedna/
LEARNING STYLES:

18. Learning Styles (take the Keirsey Temperament Sorter for personal use)



Address: http://sunsite.unc.edu/jembin/mb.pl

19. Learning Styles Article (links to WEB sites)

Address: http://www.virtualschool.edu/mon/Academia/KierseyLearningStyles.htm

20. Learning Style Inventory



Address: http://www.hcc.hawaii.edu/hccinfo/facdev/lsi.html

21. Learning Styles Sources

Address: http://www.d.umn.edu/student/loon/acad/strat/lrnsty.html
LOGIC:

22. Think (logic test questions, links to editorial and opinion pages as well as letters to the editors

from English newspapers around the world; resources for discussion groups and pages)

Address: http://www.trigger/net/~think/
MATHEMATICS:

23. Mathematics Exercises (algebra, geometry, and trigonometry)

Address: http://www.rbbs.chchost.com/
MENUS AND OTHER LINKAGES:

24. For Menus and Linkages to Numerous Other Teacher Resources (ERIC, numerous professional organizations, colleges and universities, and major publishers have resources

available through the internet. You may access many through this source.)

Address: http://www.education-world.com/
MULTICULTURAL EDUCATION:

25. Multicultural Pavillion (resources for multicultural lessons)



Address: http://curry.edschool, Virginia.EDU/go/multicultural/
MULTIPLE INTELLIGENCES:

26. Abstracts on Multiple Intelligences



Address: http://www.indiana.edu/~eric_rec/ieo/bibs/miltiple.html

27. Creativity Page (mindgames and creative activities from Tony Buzan)



Address: http://www.waterw.com/~lucia/awlinks.html

28. Laurel and Hardy and the Marx Brothers: Multiple Intelligences

(how to lighten up classroom MI approaches)

Address: http://www.newhorizons.org/rech_mi.html

29. Multiple Intelligences (link with Howard Gardner and MI projects)



Address: http://pzweb.harvard.edu/HPZpages/Whatsnew.html

30. Multiple Intelligence Explorer (a cartoon Einstein introduces the intelligences)



Address: http://education.canberra.edu.au/postgrad/ss/students/

frances/FRANCES/HTM

31. Multiple Intelligences Lesson on Humor, Satire, and Political Cartoons

Address: http://www.teachnet.org/curriculum/A16579.shtml
ORGANIZATIONS:

32. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD)



Address: http://www.ascd.org/

While at this address, you may wish to find out about the Maryland



affiliate of ASCD. If so, select Constituent Relations, then

selected Affiliates Online, then select Maryland.



SCIENCE:

  1. Energy Conservation Enhancement Project (lesson plans on energy conservation for many

subject areas)

Address: http://ecep.usl.edu/ecep/ecep.htm

34. History of Medicine (history of medicine from prehistoric to modern times)



Address:http://indy.radiology.uiowa.edu/Providers/Textbooks/SynderMed Nx/Syllabus TitlePage.html

35. Monarch Butterflies: Join the Migration! (trace the migration of these butterflies)



Address: http://www. education-world.com/a_lesson/lesson023.shtml

36. Mrs. Frizzle Helps Kids “See the Light”! (science activities for students)



Address: http://www.education-world.com/a_books/books010.shtml

37. Stanford Solar Center (information, resources, and educational activities about the sun)



Address: http://solar-center.stanford.edu/

38. You Can With Beakman and Jax (interactive demos, questions, images, and other science information for kids)



Address: http://www.youcan.com/

  1. Virtual Zoo (information and photos of over twenty animals; also information on endangered

species)

Address: http://www,vulcan-net.com/zoo/main.html
SOCIAL SCIENCES:

  1. Discoverer’s Web (a ton of links to information on discoverers and explorers from prehistoric to

modern times--is missing space exploration)

Address: http://www.win.tue.nl/cs/fm/engels/discovery/
SPECIAL EDUCATION:

41. Improving Practice in Special Education (promotes use of technology for improved education for students with physical, mental, and social disabilities)



Address: http://www.edc.org/FSC/NCIP/ncipnet_top.html

SUBJECT AREA EXPERTS:

42. Internet Access to Experts by Subject Area:

Electronic Emissary Project, University of Austin

Address: http://www.tapr.org/emissary/

2TECHNOLOGY:

43. Learning@WebSites (ideas for high school teachers wishing to link to internet and technology in the classroom)



Address: http://www.ecnet.net/users/gdlevin/home.html

44. Technology Connections (information about online resources for educators)



Address: http://www.mcrel.org/connect/tech/index/html
VISUAL ARTS:

45. The Refrigerator (weekly art contest that displays student work and allows students to choose winners)

Address: http://www.seeusa.com/refrigerator.html

46. The Star (Arts education: links to art images and suppliers)



Address: http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/2454/.
Sample Bibliographical Entries Using the APA Style (5th Edition)



Download 140.5 Kb.

Share with your friends:
  1   2




The database is protected by copyright ©www.sckool.org 2023
send message

    Main page