The Minnesota Board of Teaching Proposed Reading Standards

1. The Minnesota Board of Teaching Proposed Reading Standards Presentation by Deborah R. Dillon, University of Minnesota Gail Jordan, Bethel University MACTE Conference October 22, 2008

2. MN Reading Licensure History • Pre-2000: 4 reading educator licenses were available. • 2000-2003: No reading licenses were available. • 2001-2002: A reading task force worked with the BOT to create the current K-12 Teacher of Reading Endorsement, effective September, 2003. • Post-2003: 10 institutions were approved to offer the K-12 Teacher of Reading Endorsement programs (as of 1/08). • 2006-2007: Testing Issues re: Reading Specialist Test • January 12, 2007: Board action to establish the Reading Task Force

3. Preparation for the Task Force Work The Minnesota Academy of Reading sponsored a series of discussions at Bethel University in an effort to gain an understanding of what educational leaders, practitioners, teacher educators and policy makers felt were the critical needs in reading education for Minnesota students. From those discussions some pressing issues emerged.

4. Reading Issues Identified There was a consensus that there needed to be a more comprehensive approach to practices and policies related to teacher preparation and professional development for reading. The next generation of Minnesota teachers would likely face more complex issues related to closing the widening achievement gap, understanding the needs of ELL learners and designing and delivering effective interventions.

5. School Communities The discussions also centered on the expected level of expertise required among all staff members who would be involved in aspects of reading instruction. The consensus was that there were layers of expertise required across the multiple roles including administrators, specialists, classroom teachers and other stakeholders.

6. A Trajectory of Learning The final consensus was that there needed to be a comprehensive review of the current licensure standards in reading for teachers across all levels and career points. An overture was made to the Board of Teaching to collaborate on a systematic review of the current standards and propose any changes that may emerge from such a review.

7. Reading: Historical Context 2007: Reading Task Force Efforts • February – April: Task Force, Phase I • April 19: Report to BOT Advisory Committee • May 11: Phase I report to BOT • May – September: Task Force, Phase II • September 14: Phase II report to the BOT • Stakeholder input: October 26 & November 8 2008: • Input used to revise standards; document presented to the BOT in July 2008; standards passed by BOT • Sept-Oct. 24th: standards drafted into rule; currently under review

8. Reading Task Force * • John Alexander Groves Academy • Karen Balmer MN Board of Teaching • Karen Bihrle MN Department of Education • Eva Boehm MN Reading Association • Terri Christenson MN Reading License Coalition • Deborah Dillon MN Association of Colleges of Teacher Education • Claire Eckley International Dyslexia Association • Garnet Franklin Education Minnesota • JoAnne Glasgow MN Association of Colleges of Teacher Education • Carolyn Gwinn MN Academy of Reading • Gail Jordan MN Academy of Reading • Bonnie Houck MN Department of Education • John Melick MN Department of Education • Amy Smith MN Association of Colleges of Teacher Education • Susan Thomson Parent Advocacy Group • JoAnn Van Aernum MN Board of Teaching * Note: Several task force members represent more than one stakeholder group.

9. Task Force Charge • To develop recommendations addressing the initial preparation and continued development of teachers of reading in Minnesota.

10. Goals for the BOT Reading Task Force Updatethe 2003 K-12 Teacher of Reading Standards Proactively address the changing literacy needs of Minnesota students and the preparation and continued professional development of teachers Provide a strong foundation for, and coherence between MN standards for preparing and developing teachers in the area of reading and national standards (e.g., International Reading Association; NBPTS), Minnesota K-12 student standards in reading/language arts, and other initiatives (e.g., draft Minnesota College and Work-Readiness ELA Expectations--created by the P-16 committee) 10

11. Goals for the Reading Task Force -cont. Develop a Comprehensive Framework Include the professional development needs of K-12 educators who support students’ reading development and those who serve as reading leaders Develop a seamless set of standards that will follow teachers throughout their professional careers Substantive & Rigorous Requirements Outlines the specific knowledge and practices teachers at various levels of preparation need to be effective educators who are able to support students’ reading needs

12. Reading Task ForceGuiding Question “What knowledge, skills, and practices do birth to grade 12 preservice teachers (initial licensure), novice and experienced classroom teachers (licensure renewal), teachers with advanced reading knowledge (K-12), and reading leaders (K-12) need to know and be able to do to best support the needs of all readers in their classrooms?” 12

13. Task Force Work • Initial Licensure • Early Childhood (Birth – Age 8) License • Elementary Education License • Middle School Licenses • Selected Secondary Licenses • Licensed Teachers • Clock Hours: License Renewal • Advanced Licensure • Teacher of Reading Endorsement • NEW: Reading Leader Endorsement

14. Standards in proposed framework Foundational Knowledge Instructional Strategies and Materials Assessment, Diagnosis, Evaluation and Intervention (includes language re: a specific clinical experience linked to coursework) Creating a Literate and Motivating Environment Professionalism 14

15. Sample Matrix 15

16. Stakeholder Input:October 26 & November 8, 2007

17. Steps Completed in the Process • Task force analysis of stakeholder input (early 2008) • Identification of challenges • Proposed resolutions • Development of recommendations for licensure rules • Stakeholder input (spring 2008) • Reading communities • Broader communities • Recommendations made to the Board of Teaching (July 2008); passed by the BOT at their July meeting

18. Current & Future Steps • Rulemaking process (initiated in Sept. 2008) • Generally 12-18 months • MORE stakeholder input • Rule adoption • Rule effective date

19. Early Childhood and Elementary Preservice Standards

20. Language for EC and Elementary Proposed Standards In developing the language for the proposed standards we examined the current rule related to reading current research on emergent literacy and elementary reading the current definition of reading (NRP) that addressed the 5 components of reading and other definitions of reading (e.g., RAND Report; NAEP 2009 framework) current research in the area of EC and elementary teacher preparation (e.g., knowledge, pedagogy, and dispositions)

21. Template We developed competencies in each of the domains: Foundational Knowledge Instructional Strategies and Materials Assessment, Diagnosis, Evaluation and Intervention Creating a Literate and Motivating Environment Professionalism

22. Stakeholder Feedback & Next Steps We sent the proposed language out for feedback from the BOT identified stakeholder groups. We revised the language in light of the feedback. The format adopted by the Task Force will assist institutions in designing effective EC and elementary reading courses and clinical experiences.

23. Presentation on Content Preservice Standards

24. How the Subgroup Approached the Content Standards We examined all 5-12, 9-12 and K-12 standards to see what language the current rule had in place related to reading. We reviewed that language to see if there should be new language added. We decided whether to add language from the new K-6 proposed changes or add the new language for the 5-12/9-12 licenses (e.g., spec. ed; TESOL).

25. New Language for 5-12 and 9-12 In developing the language for the proposed changes we examined current research on adolescent literacy and high school reform. We attempted to have a format that was consistent with the Early Childhood, K-6 format. We developed language that was in keeping with the current definition of reading that addressed the 5 components of reading, as well as other definitions of reading (e.g., RAND Report).

26. Application for Each License We looked at each licensure area to determine the relevance of the proposed language. We examined the content of the current language and eliminated the redundancy. We sent the proposed language out for feedback from the BOT identified stakeholder groups. We revised the language in light of the feedback.

27. Current Language • Each content license that has proposed changes has competencies in three areas. • There are competencies that relate to understanding the aspects of the reading process that impact readers at the secondary level. • There are competencies that related to instructional strategies that support reading across different content areas. • There are specific competencies related to that discipline that will impact learning.

28. Presentation on Graduate Level Reading Standards

29. Reading Teacher This language will replace the current language contained in the K-12 Teachers of Reading license currently offered at the graduate level in 10 institutions. The new language will strengthen the competencies in the 5 domains. The emphasis will be on building level leadership and instructional duties.

30. Reading Leader There is a new license, the Reading Leader, that creates another tier of expertise. The Reading Leader has more concentrated competencies in leadership and coaching. The license is meant for the reading professional interested in more district-wide responsibilities. Currently this license is not required for any specific teaching assignment.

31. Who will use these standards and for what purposes? Institutions of Higher Education, Teacher Educators Teachers (pre-service and in-service) Students in degree and licensure programs Administrators and school-districts Professional Development Coordinators Reading Consultants Parents 31

32. How Will We Move Forward? • Leadership and vision are required to lead MN forward in the area of reading teacher development. • Minnesota reading leaders and faculty from institutions across the state are poised to work collaboratively to develop innovative ways to put these new standards into practice. • We will hold a series of co-sponsored faculty work sessions in ‘08-09 to work on redesigning coursework and clinical experiences to integrate the new standards and develop consistency across institutions; new assessments will also be developed and some may be shared across institutions.

33. Concluding Remarks Respected reading researcher Michael Pressley (2002) commented “it is hard to be an effective literacy teacher and difficult to learn how to become one.” (p. 344) The proposed MN Reading Standards, and reading colleagues statewide, acknowledge this reality and seek solutions to this challenge.