RDG 579 Technology in Reading and Large View
 Language Arts Instruction
 Spring Semester, 2008
 Catherine Kurkjian, Ed.D.

Course Portfolio (10 points)             Back to RDG 579 Home Page

Electronic Portfolio Template
Directions for Program Portfolio

Program Portfolio Orientation
Packaging a CD (to burn on a CD so all the links work)

 

Course Portfolio  (10 points)  

You will develop a portfolio demonstrating competencies in Standard 2.0 Element 2.2  according to Program Standards developed by the International Reading Association. You will use your Technological Instructional Model to demonstrate your competency for this element. Please address the Reflection Questions below for your Reflection on your selected project..  
(IRA Teaching Competencies)(REVISED STANDARDS)

 

 
bullet Explore current trends, conceptual frameworks, research base and standards relating to technology and literacy instruction (1.2, 1.5, 2.13,2.14) 1.1, 1.4
bullet Identify elements of developmental, corrective and content area reading that can be effectively enhanced through networked communication instruction and computer based instruction.  1.4, 4.2
bullet Review a variety of web based professional resources that support and enhance reading and language arts instruction.  4.2, 4.4
bullet Review and compare and evaluate available software evaluation instruments and apply them to commercial software programs.4.2
bullet Explore and develop teaching strategies for incorporating and integrating web based and computer-based instruction into the Reading and Language Arts curriculum and including the development of original multimedia lessons for classroom use. 2.1,2.2, 2.3, 4.4
bullet Use technology as a way to enhance  professionalism and to support communication with colleagues and parents and the wider community. 5.1, 5.2, 5.3

 

REFLECTION QUESTIONS

  1. Did you discuss your understanding of all the components of the element in a standard, as well as the importance and value of the element toward your becoming a reading and language arts professional?
  2. Did you explicitly connect how your artifact demonstrates the element in the standard?
  3. Did you elaborate on what you learned from the process of creating the artifact?
  4. Did you reflect on how this learning experience can be transferred to your classroom practice to enhance your students’ learning and your work as a teacher leader?
  5. Did you cite professional literature and/or research to support your description of the value of the standard?
  6. Did you cite and reference APA style?

 

 

NAME: ___________________    REVIEWER: __________________  DATE: _____________                                                             

                  

 

COURSE __RDG 579________________   STANDARD# _____2.0  ____________  ELEMENT# __2.2______     

Technologically Mediated Book Discussions

 RATING: (Circle One)   Target           Acceptable                Unacceptable-(Needs Revision)

PORTFOLIO RUBRIC

ELEMENTS

TARGET

ACCEPTABLE

UNACCEPTABLE

#1 Artifact aligns with Course Objective, Standard Element and SEPS Conceptual Framework.

All aspects of the artifact, documentation, performance data, or experience strongly support appropriate course objective and element in a standard as aligned with SEPS conceptual framework.

Some aspects of artifact, documentation, performance data, or experience support appropriate course objective and element in a standard as aligned with SEPS conceptual framework.

The artifact, documentation, performance data, or experience does not support appropriate course objective and element in a standard as aligned with SEPS conceptual framework.

#2 Reflection addresses all components of Standard Element and the reflection questions.

Reflection convincingly and accurately demonstrates understanding of all components of the element in a standard. Clearly articulated rationale for the selection and inclusion of artifact. Addresses all reflection questions.

Reflection convincingly and accurately demonstrates understanding of some components of the element in a standard. Clearly articulated rationale for the selection and inclusion of artifact. Addresses most of the reflection questions.

Reflection demonstrates inaccurate understanding of components of the element in a standard.

 

RDG 579 HOME PAGE Final Portfolio & Matrix(of old standards)

  COURSE OUTLINE ASSIGNMENTS   NCTE/IRA STANDARDS
&
IRA Teaching Competencies (Revised)
&
ISTE Technology Standards 		OBJECTIVES ALIGNED WITH STANDARDS AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK