Curriculum Renovation

Curriculum Innovation 1

Joint Command and Staff College

Mubarak Al AbdullahJoint Command and Staff College

PREPARATION COURSE

Proposal for Curriculum Innovation:

Implementation of Systemic Change;

Current Pedagogical Theories, Methodologies, Strategies,

Techniques, and Practices

Adapted to an English Special Purpose Military Course

Submitted by: Robert Hobbs

June 28, 2006

Proposal for Curriculum Innovation to Adhere to the Recommendations of Current PedagogicalTheories, Methodologies, Strategies, Techniques, and Practices for the ESL/EFL/ESP

Learning Environment; Submitted by Robert Hobbs on June 28, 2006



Abstract: The purpose of this proposal is to assess the

student needs of the staff military college according to

current recommendations in the pedagogical literature as

well as the theoretical and applied linguistic literature in

the specific areas of English as a Second Language [ESL],

English as a Foreign Language [EFL], and English for Special

Purposes [ESP]. Consideration is given to scheduling

innovation to incorporate recapitulation and a grammar

component; formative and summative assessment as built into

the curriculum to reinforce student learning; the

development of a student centered syllabus that incorporates

meta-cognitive introspection and reflection activities; the

incorporation of a thorough student workbook to enhance

student learning that coordinates with the student text; new

student texts that are complete with encyclopedic glossaries





that are indexed alphabetically and contain target military

terminology with collocational examples; a topical index

that addresses locations in both the text and the workbook;

relevant and useful front matter and back matter that

incorporate useful language acquisition and lexicographical

information, both onomasiological and semasiological; a

separate grammar text, such as Murphy’s Grammar or an

equivalent, level appropriate for the students that is

intended for modular adaptation into the curriculum; the

incorporation of the most common idiomatic and phrasal verb

language into the daily curriculum; and a new grading

application that incorporates a daily grade as a major

component in order to facilitate classroom management,

enforce timetable demands, motivate students to participate

and complete assignments, reduce testing anxiety, introduce

alternative assessments that include portfolio development

and facilitate the actual writing of the final term paper,

which is currently purchased by most students according to





the teachers and supported by jocularity invoked by students

concerning this cumulative project.

Table of Contents for Curriculum Innovation Proposal

Classroom Management……..……………………………………………………………6

Accountability and Scoring

High-Stakes Testing, Secrecy, and Research

Tests as Transparent Teaching Tools for Learning

Error-Analysis and Improvement…..……………………………………………..7

Rubric & Score Deductions to Facilitate Classroom

Management

Uniformity in Grading……………….……………………………………………8

Cycle Skill Focus to Enhance Performance

Table 1. Correlation of Cycles and Skill Focus

Scheduling……………………………………..…………………………………………..9

Formative Assessments and Recapitulation Component

Level-appropriate Grammar Component…… …………………………………..10

Student Centered Syllabus…………………………….…………………………………11

Learning Centered Theme

A change of focus





Embedded Cooperative Learning Activities across

Syndication…..…………….12

Mixed Method Tracking Approach to Maximize Learning

The Final Cycle…………………………………………………….…………….13

Materials and the Reading and Vocabulary Aspects

Innovation of the Student Text…………………………………………………..14

Index and Cross-referential Glossary

Incorporation of Current Topics

Deletion of Unnecessary Components……………………..

…………….15

Simplification and Level-appropriate

Implementation

Student Workbooks

Cooperative Learning Activities…………………………………………16

Individual Oral Performance Activities

First Draft and Final Draft Writing

Opportunities……………………….17

Meta-cognitive Reflection and Redirection

Student Notebooks and Portfolios……………………………………….18





Grammar Component Incorporated into the Curriculum

Grammar Incorporated into the Schedule,

explanation………………….19

Grammar Incorporated Daily

Scoring…………………………………...20

Grammar Incorporated into Overall Scoring Scheme

Grammar Component, level appropriate

Grammar Incorporated into the Schedule………………………………

21

Grammar Assessed Formatively; pedagogical

integration………………22

Grammar Integrated into the Writing and Research

Component

Spoken English Aspect

Pronunciation and Articulation Component, Vocabulary

Reinforcement

Formative Assessment and Evaluation

Innovation………………………………23

Performance Activities Embedded into the Curriculum





Listening Aspect…………………………………………………………………...…….24

Scheduled Listening Exercises, Vocabulary

reinforcement, Daily application

Formative Assessment and Self-Evaluation, Applied to

Daily Schedule

Dictation and Spelling incorporated into Listening

Activities…………………24

Incorporation of International English Listening

Activities

Writing Aspect…………………………………………………………………………..25

Grammar, Spelling, and Vocabulary Reinforcement,

Applied daily

First Draft Correction as Un-graded Critique

Assessments

Formative Assessments and Daily Scoring

Summative assessments and Cumulative Cycle Scoring….

……………………..26

Didactic Innovation and Teacher/Facilitator Professional

Development





Pedagogical Consistency Addressed; Curriculum delivery

and scoring

Curriculum Delivery and Scoring………………………………………………..27

Peer Observation Component for Reflective and

Professional Development

Collegial Coaching for Curriculum Consistency and

Thoroughness

Application of Assessment Standards……………………………………………28

Interviewing, Hiring, and Evaluating New Teachers

Discussion of Interview Question Formulation

Rationale……………………….29

Interview

Questions………………………..........................................

.................32

Formative Rubric for Teacher Evaluation

Rationale…………………………….34

Summative Rubric for Teacher Evaluation

Rationale…………………………...37





Formative Rubric for Teacher

Evaluation……………………………………….38

Summative Rubric for Teacher Evaluation………………………………………

40

Summaries..………………………………………………………………………………42

Referential Substantiation………………………………………………………………44

The Framework: Classroom Management, Scoring, Scheduling, and Syllabus

Classroom Management

Accountability and Scoring

The key to Classroom Management is ACCOUNTABILITY

through scoring. Under the present system there is no daily

grade. For students to learn successfully, scores for each

period of the day are essential. For student motivation,

progress, and accountability, every assignment must count as

part of the daily or weekly score, depending on how much

time was spent on the assignment. Scores from each period

of the day result in a daily score. The accumulation of

daily scores should count for 75% of the student grades to





reduce test anxiety and promote learning and skill

development..

High-Stakes Testing, Secrecy, and Research

The only scores that matter currently are the monthly

test scores. This situation is referred to as High-Stakes

Testing in the pedagogical literature. High-stakes testing

de-motivates and demoralizes students according to the

research. Under the present system, students cannot see

their tests after they have been graded. According to the

research, testing secrecy de-motivates and demoralizes

students because students feel powerless and hopeless

because they do not understand their errors, or they

erroneously think they had no errors and the system is

against them, or they know they had errors but do not think

they can improve unless they can know their errors so they

can improve. This situation produces cynicism and paranoia.

Tests as a Transparent Teaching Tool for Learning

Tests are supposed to be used as a teaching tool, but

currently they are a waste of time for teachers and students





because teachers cannot use tests to demonstrate correct

answers and explain errors. Students gain nothing from

current testing except anxiety and stress, which are

detractors from learning. This situation is demoralizing for

teachers because tests given without follow-up are sadistic

ways to terrorize students by increasing their anxiety

levels. According to research, an increase in anxiety

results in less learning because students are less receptive

to learning as well cognitively impaired in regard to memory

retrieval.

Error-Analysis and Improvement

Under this proposal, Reading Exams are given back and

error analysis explains if student misunderstanding was due

to grammar, vocabulary, collocational, or connotational

error. Listening Exams are returned and repeated so that

students understand the semantic, articulation, and

phonological connection. Writing Exams are returned so that

students can re-write their essays and learn from their

syntax, grammar, spelling, and vocabulary mistakes. Speaking





Exams are recorded and listened to by the teacher with the

student so that the student understands what he said that

was not perfect and what he should have said so he can

improve his articulation, enunciation, pronunciation,

elocution, sentence structure, and circumlocution. Finally,

Grammar Tests should be returned so that students can

understand their mistakes in conjugations, subject-verb

agreement, preposition omissions, sentence fragmentation,

and relative clause connections.

Rubric and Score Deductions to Facilitate Classroom Management

A rubric is furnished to students that depict the

attributes of an excellent student, a good student, and a

mediocre student. An excellent student is punctual,

prepared, stays on task for the duration of class, does not

leave class until the break, fully meets expectation of

teacher and fellow classmates, and produces results every

class period. Score deductions are made for tardiness,

speaking in Arabic, leaving class in the middle or early, or

talking on a cell phone during class. These grading





procedures facilitate teachers keeping students on task.

Having students self-assess with accurate checklists assures

student endorsement of the transparent scoring policy and

rubrics.

Uniformity in Grading

All teachers use the same scoring method. Each period

is worth 10 points. Five periods per day equals 50 points

per day. Five days per week equals 250 points per week for

cumulative quality performance score. Weekly portfolio

assessment depicts the quantitative performance score. At

the end of the month, the quality performance score is worth

50%, which represents work ethic, daily diligence, tenacity,

and focus; the quantity performance score is worth 25%,

which represents the accumulation of completed work; and the

formative tests are worth 25%, which include 5% each:

Reading, Writing, Speaking, Listening, and Grammar, and are

reviewed later with the students for error analysis.

Cycle Skill Focus to Enhance Performance





Most ESL environments give grammar-based tests to

assess level. Grammar is an accurate level of language

assimilation because accuracy in grammar indicates language

accuracy. The movement of students to different syndicates

is dependent on each variable in order to reduce student

anxiety at being moved because of the intention to improve

particular skills due to the strategic placement. The

following table portrays the skill focus of each cycle.

TEST Indicator for PLACEMENT Skill Focus

Pre-test: Based on Grammar

Results

Cycle 1 Focus: Grammar &

Listening

End of Cycle 1: Listening

Indicator

Cycle 2 Focus: Reading &

Vocabulary

End of Cycle 2: Reading

Indicator

Cycle 3 Focus: Decoding –

Grammar, Listening, and

Reading Objective Test

Composite Preparation

End of Cycle 3: Objective

Test Composite of Grammar,

Cycle 4 Focus: Encoding –

Speaking & Writing





Listening, and Reading Preparation

End of Cycle 4: Multi-Level

Ability placement based on

averages

Cycle 5 Focus: Cooperative

Learning and Collaboration

End of Cycle 5: Placement

based on Speaking and Writing

ranked scores

Cycle 6 Focus: Final Research

Project and PowerPoint

Presentation

End of Cycle 6: Graduation

Test – Early Dismissal &

Redistribution of Students

Cycle 7 Focus: Graduation and

Satisfactory Completion of

Course

Scheduling

Formative Assessments and Recapitulation Component

As of May 23, 2006, no evidence of formative

assessments has been observed in either classroom

observation or in the curriculum. Formative assessments are

critical to monitor student performance and give teachers

feedback for what re-teaching needs to occur in order to

maximize teachable class time. This proposal suggests that





the beginning of every day is devoted to recapitulation in

various forms: quizzes, reflective writing, short answer

questionnaires, gap-fills, and graphic organizers of

information. These assessment activities is self-scored,

self-reported, and teacher monitored. Each assessment

activity is implemented in phases. The first phase

facilitates recall memory. The second phase offers an answer

selection key that facilitates recognition memory. The third

phase evolves into the collective memory of a cooperative

learning group and the final and fourth phase, if necessary,

turns the activity into a learning activity that utilizes

notes first, then the individual portfolio, and finally the

text or appropriate source of information. A rubric is

designed to define what is an excellent performance [10],

very good [9], quite good [8], adequate [7], and needs to

improve [6]; deductions must reflect tardiness [-1], leaving

in the middle of class [-1], leaving class early [-1], and

any penalties imposed and agreed upon by the class





beforehand to serve as a consequence for other infractions

collectively defined.

Level-appropriate Grammar Component

Grammar is essential for writing and speaking;

therefore, grammar is a necessary component to the

curriculum. Students are tested and grouped according to

grammar skill ability for the grammar component. There are

two ways of implementing the grammar component. One is to

set aside a period everyday for grammar encoding and

decoding, which could be generalized to other tasks when a

desired level of grammar proficiency is reached, at which

time the period could be devoted to in-class writing and re-

writing of the research paper. Regular formative assessments

are a necessary part of learning grammar, which can be

accomplished in a variety of ways. The grammar grade must be

part of the final grade to enforce participation in this

essential component of writing and speaking. Currently, many

students at the staff college speak in fragmented sentences,

confuse vocabulary, mispronounce words, and the writing is





the worst I have ever seen pervasive in an institution of

learning. Unless students are made acutely aware of their

errors and need for improving, then the learning institution

is to blame for student complacency. This situation must be

turned around so that students can have a genuine sense of

accomplishment that is warranted. Meanwhile, teachers must

be positive and encouraging. Students must receive praise

for efforts and redirected purposefully to correct their

errors.

Student-Centered Syllabus

Learning-Centered Theme; A change in focus

According to the literature, high-stakes testing is

damaging to student self-esteem and motivation. Frequent

summative testing actually reduces learning output or

instigates an increasing drop-out rate, attitudes of

cynicism, and increases stress. Testing secrecy serves to

make testing companies rich while contributing to student

feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, and despair. The

research literature in pedagogy recommends that the





curriculum adequately scaffold to prepare students for

tests, inform students of exactly what they will be tested

on, keep tests transparent, and return tests to students to

use as a learning tool so that students use tests as a

learning tool and empower students by giving them the

opportunity to adequately prepare for their summative

assessments and evaluations.

A Change of Focus

In the current curriculum, too many teachers to no

fault of their own are providing teacher-centered classes

that are diametrically oppositional to the recommendations

in the ESL/EFL literature for the past 20 years. The

curriculum must be designed with sufficient student-centered

activities that focus on learning, manipulation of new

vocabulary, controlled grammar exercises, friendly

competitions for standard correctness, and not busy,

pointless unstructured rambling, which should be penalized

[-1] after a first verbal warning, especially if the

rambling is not in English.





Embedded Cooperative/Collaborative Learning Activities

Every period should contain a learning activity that

contains the central theme or learning goal for the period.

Classes begin with a quick warm-up activity; then, an

explanation of the learning activity follows. The

explanation is provided on the whiteboard or the overhead

projector or in handouts and also given orally with an

opportunity for student questions. These activities are

built into the curriculum so there is intended uniformity

across the curriculum.

Mixed Method Tracking Approach to Maximize Learning

According to the pedagogical research literature, there

are more advantages to mixed-ability grouping than

disadvantages. In a foreign language environment, the

advantage of mixed level grouping is that there are more

students to model the language orally, grammatically, and in

written form, as well as students who understand the

listening exercise and can explain it to others. This

proposal suggests that:





Cycle 1 arranges students in order of grammar level to

facilitate a focus on the accuracy of spoken and

written English – the grammar scores, a subjective

test;

Cycle 2 arranges students in order of oral decoding

skills to facilitate understanding the teachers who

speak in English – the listening scores, a subjective

test;

Cycle 3 arranges students in order of reading ability

to focus on vocabulary building and following written

instruction – the reading scores, a subjective test;

Cycle 4 arranges students according to an average of

encoding abilities to facilitate preparation for the

final oral and written cumulative assignment – an

averaging of the writing and speaking scores, two

objectively scored tests;

Cycle 5 arranges students according to mixed ability to

facilitate the mixing of students, collaborative

learning, cooperative projects, and provide student





models for learning in every class – scores are

averaged and an even distribution of student abilities

are present in every syndicate;

Cycle 6 arranges students according to score hierarchy

to facilitate presentations that are given by students

of the same skill ability level.

.

The Final Cycle

Syndicate One can be excused earliest to begin their

research, but all writing must be done in the presence of a

teacher to ensure that the work belongs to the student and

that the student is profiting from this learning situation.

Students can be excused as soon as they complete their final

projects. Each week, the students are re-distributed to

reduce the number of students in each class to facilitate

exiting students and teacher-student ratio reduction to

allow for an equal distribution of students. To compensate

for fractions, the higher syndicates will have one or two

more students than the lower students. Attention is paid to





the gaps between levels in distributing students so that

distribution is neither arbitrary nor automatic, but with

consideration of what best serves the needs of students.

Materials: The Reading and Vocabulary Aspects

The materials include the Student Reading Text and the

Student Workbook. An addition of a grammar book will

facilitate improved speaking and writing. Quite frankly,

students learn what they are taught. Some teachers have the

attitude that students cannot learn, yet there are students

with more accurate speaking and writing abilities at Subhan

than here at the Staff College. It does not have to be that

way. With grammar as a component of the assessment and

evaluation grade, then students will work to learn syntax

and conjugation to achieve high scores because of the

incentive and motivation. In the process of learning grammar

they will speak English just as well or better than

foreigners that come to participate in the main course.

Innovation of the Student Text

Index and Cross-Referential Glossary





The first renovation of the Student Text is to add a

topical index. The second renovation is to add a cross-

referentially indexed encyclopedic glossary that includes

the lexeme paradigm and collocational examples; the index

cites page numbers in the Student Workbook as well as the

Student Textbook.

Incorporation of Current Topics

The innovation of the Student Textbook refers to the

Student Workbook that outlines a way to incorporate the

current news topic heard on the radio, seen on television,

read in the newspaper, or discussed on the internet or among

colleagues. Assignments include having each student listen,

read, or watch the media at home and note the topics; then,

share their notes with their cooperative learning group. Not

doing homework negatively impacts the daily class grade.

Today, students do not do their homework because there is no

incentive for them to do homework.

.

.





Deletion of Unnecessary Components

In student surveys, students revealed that most of the

Submarine lessons were extraneous, unnecessary, and useless.

Teachers mentioned that the submarine lessons were too

specific and too long for students who have no use for

knowledge about subs. This matter needs closer consideration

in order to delineate exactly what should be deleted and

what is beneficial.

Simplification and Level-appropriate Implementation

To assist the maneuverability of students into

different syndicate levels based on different criteria,

providing a simplified version is beneficial to everyone.

Since students improve at varying rates, a graduated system

is only desirable for the grammar component. Many students

are very fluent, but cannot write. Some read very well, but

cannot speak very well. Each student is on different skill

levels of English in regard to reading, writing, speaking,

listening, vocabulary, and grammar. For this reason, one

simplified version is beneficial to students for either some





or all of the texts. There has been some discussion about

simplifying everything and throwing out the sophisticated

version, however this solution is not suitable for preparing

students for the main course. The better alternative is to

rewrite what is unnecessarily complicated, convoluted, or

superfluous, to delete what is poorly written and

irrelevant, and to rewrite what is poorly written but

useful.

Student Workbooks

The student workbooks are an integral part of each day.

Every lesson contains activities that utilize the workbooks.

Teachers check student workbooks daily to assess progress.

Satisfactory completion of workbooks is an essential part of

daily scoring. The rubric assumes that workbooks are

utilized; therefore, use of workbooks positively influence

daily scores, but lack of workbook usage partially negates

the daily score. Homework is often done in the workbooks

negatively impacts daily score if not completed to

predetermined degrees.





Cooperative Learning Activities

Records of cooperative learning activities are kept in

the student workbooks and/or student notebooks. Cooperative

learning activities have four types of scoring: student

self-evaluation, internal group evaluation, external group

evaluation, teacher evaluation, or a predetermined

composite. The daily cooperative learning activity plays a

proportionate role in the grading scheme for the periods

that student collaboration takes place. Scoring methods vary

and are negotiated or predetermined by the teacher.

Cooperative learning groups range from pairs to groups of no

more than five, which means that classrooms with eleven or

twelve students have three groups of four, four groups of

three, or five pairs. Students should not be working

individually during activities that call for group

interaction. Groups change based on the task, activity, or

lesson. Grouping students is sometimes spontaneous and

teacher determined, spontaneous and student determined,

preplanned and voluntary, or preplanned and teacher





determined, depending on the task, purpose, and goal.

Sometimes students are grouped because of comparable skill

levels, contrasting skill levels, compatibility to the

assignment, convenience of the student or teacher, or

criterion based. Groups change depending on the task or

activity. The teacher floats from group to group to answer

questions, clarify instructions, monitor the activity, and

to maintain student focus, accomplishment, and universal

participation.

Individual Oral Performance Activity

Students get input, then give output: students listen

or read, then react by writing or speaking. Another method

is: the students listen and gap fill, they read correlating

information, write a summary, then give an oral evaluation.

At least every other day will involve students briefly

speaking in front of the class. During the first cycle,

students perform in pairs. Then, after students are

acquainted and gain confidence, students give individual

performances. When performing in pairs, one student can





write while the other one speaks. Outlines, tables, charts,

and new vocabulary are displayed on the board or depicted on

construction paper, the overhead projector, or power point.

Different methods for students presenting orally in front of

class include: giving a brief or summary, explaining text or

vocabulary, or giving answers, an interview, debate, or role

play.

First Draft and Final Draft Writing Opportunities

First drafts are never graded. First drafts are always

corrected and returned to students for final draft writing.

Tenacious students rewrite more than once to achieve

perfection. The final draft is the one in which the student

is satisfied with the writing and the score. The final draft

is required to meet a benchmark standard.

Meta-cognitive Reflection and Redirection

From time to time students are asked at the end of the

day to write a short reflection on the learning accomplished

for the day, or if in the morning, the previous day. Meta-

cognitivity has to do with analyzing how one learns and what





motivates one to learn. The learner reflects: What is better

- listening to a tape, watching a film, or surfing the

internet - for a particular assignment? Which lesson was

topically of more interest to the learner and why? What

performance activity was the most interesting for the week

and why? These questions change from day to day and the

answers will vary. Not writing and turning in reflection

paragraphs negatively impacts grades of students in this

proposed systemic change. Research demonstrates that

reflecting on learning increases memory retention.

Reflection allows the reiteration of what was learned

because first it was pondered, considered, and compared,

then it was written down, and next it was reread to compare

what was written with what was thought. Reflections acts as

reinforcement.

Student Notebooks and Portfolios

Students must maintain notebooks for writing

assignments. Portfolios are maintained by each student to

serve as evidence of learning. Final draft writing





assignments are accumulated in portfolios for reference when

students embark on their final projects. Information in

portfolios is accessible for oral presentations, writing

assignments, and third phase formative assessment

activities. Printouts of PowerPoint presentations and Excel

forms designed by each student are included in portfolios,

as well as evidence of presentations and any other work

appropriate as designed by the curriculum and decided upon

by the teaching staff and supervisors, including military

staff.

Grammar Component, Level Appropriate

Grammar is essential for learning to write, for

speaking properly, for understanding text accurately when

reading, and for accurate listening comprehension. The

grammar component will also address the learning of syntax,

prefixes, suffixes, word part information, and semantic

analysis of morpho-phonemes as well as information regarding

phrasal verbs, idiomatic phrases, homonym differentiation

including homophones and homographs, and other pertinent and





useful linguistic information that will enhance English

language usage regarding, morphology, lexicology,

stylistics, spelling, pragmatics, discourse analysis, and

lexicography, but only the practical and functional aspects,

not the esoteric theoretical or pedagogical labeling

information.

Ideally, if syndicates 5 & 6 begin one or two months

early, then grammar will be an important component to

catching their English level up to the level of their

colleagues in the higher syndicates. Grammar may inherently

boost vocabulary learning. Murphy’s Grammar book at the

intermediate level, or a similar book, is a necessary tool

to ameliorate the English functional level of students. A

pre-intermediate English book or handouts will be used for

classes that begin early. Then the early classes will

convert to the intermediate book. The supervisor will

provide supplemental materials from his own specialized ESL

private library and some materials will be created according

to current ESL [English Second Language] and ESP [English





Special Purpose] strategies and methodologies that will be

adapted to this special English purposes environment of

Military English.

Grammar Incorporated into the Schedule

One period per day will be devoted to grammar. As the

higher syndicates complete the grammar course, the period

can be used to enhance the other aspects of English,

reading, writing, speaking, and listening, and to further

complete the requirements of the course, including

PowerPoint presentations, portfolio augmentation, research,

and final project work.

.

.

Grammar Incorporated into Daily Scoring

The way to enforce grammar exercise completion is to

have the grammar period worth 20% of the daily score and to

have a separate grammar test that is comparable in value to

the reading, writing, speaking, and listening tests. Grammar

tests correlate with the grammar covered in the most recent





grammar class completed. The grammar tests incorporate the

content of the military texts in the reading and listening

classes to reinforce and enhance the information learned.

All classes have an inter-disciplinary design to complement

the activities in the other classes with other skill

focuses.

Grammar Incorporated into Overall Scoring Scheme

The grammar score is 5% of the score for the final

cycle score. Reading, writing, listening and speaking are

each 5% of the final cycle score. These five components of

testing comprise 25% of the final cycle score. The

portfolios, the qualitative aspect of scoring, comprise

another 25% of the cycle score and daily participation, the

quantitative aspect of the cycle score comprises 50% of the

final score to ensure student accomplishment of homework,

class assignments, and punctual, thorough class

participation. The students will be informed of all grading

criteria and procedures. Students will be furnished with

rubrics, checklists, assignment outlines, and course





requirements as well as a student-centered syllabus to

enable students to anticipate and plan for assignment

delivery.

Grammar Component, level appropriate

If indeed Syndicates 5 & 6 are permitted to begin

early, then a lower intermediate grammar book will be

utilized. Murphy’s is an excellent book that presents usable

vocabulary with the grammar exercises, which can be used to

elicit semantic interpretation from students to check

comprehension of meaning. Murphy’s is excellent because the

exercises start with immense control that support learning,

then allows for greater student autonomy in creating

appropriate structures that reinforce fuller understanding.

In the Back Matter of Murphy’s Grammar is a “self-test” so

that students can find out exactly which grammar points they

do not know. The teachers must use this section of the text

to initially assess exactly where to begin, what to review,

and in which section to start teaching to maximize time

usage.





Grammar Incorporated into the Schedule

The beginning of the day should involve current events

utilizing the news every morning. The current events will

draw the students into learning mode, then the next period

of the day should be grammar structures, which are needed

early on while students are still fresh and ready to receive

technical material. Teachers must know that vocabulary is

kept simple when stressing grammar points and grammar is

kept simple when teaching vocabulary usage. When teaching

grammar or vocabulary, concepts used are clear and precise,

not ambiguous. Ambiguity is saved for contextual aspects of

the lesson in which the vocabulary and grammar used is

already know by students.

Grammar is a necessary daily component at the onset of

the course, but can be phased into writing and reinforced

with speaking exercises. Speaking exercises should always

stress pronunciation through choral responses that keep

stress levels to a minimum. The aim of teachers is always to

allow students to self-correct, which is prompted with





subtle, preferably non-verbal, signals offered by the

teachers, such as a raised eye-brow, head movement

signifying a question, or slightly raised index fingers. If

the gesture goes unnoticed by the student, then repeating

the words slowly, questioningly allows the student time to

analyze what he said.

Grammar Assessed Formatively, pedagogical integration

Grammar must be tested formatively on a daily basis,

briefly, to check student understanding. Precision in

speaking and writing necessitates accurate grammar. A

grammar component should accompany every aspect of the

military curriculum beginning with the basic grammar, then

expanding to phrasal verbs and idiomatic phrases. A morpho-

grammatical focus teaches students to teach themselves

meanings of words by using parts of words. Attention to

syntax teaches students semantic variability based on word

position and sequence.

Grammar Integrated into the Writing and Research Component





As each syndicate completes the grammar component, then

this time allotment will change to a writing focus, then

eventually a research focus. Initially, students will be

grouped based on grammar level, but each cycle will have a

different focus so that students strive to excel within each

aspect of English.

Spoken English Aspect

Pronunciation and Articulation Component, Vocabulary

Reinforcement

When new vocabulary is taught, then whole grammatical

and collocational paradigms need to be introduced and

reinforced. Students must be taught how to pronounce, spell

and write, and use new words in sentences. Pronunciation

must be done in choral settings so there is no stress.

.

.

Formative Assessment and Evaluation

Formative Assessment and Evaluation Innovation equips

students by stressing short quizzes given using different





styles, matching or gap-fill, for instance. Formative

assessments are self-graded and self-reported. Students

learn from their mistakes.

Performance Activities as Assessment and Reinforcement

Performance Activities embedded into the Curriculum

create opportunities to share collaboratively ideas, divide

aspects of a topic, and present different perspectives to

the class. This should be a normal part of classes: input

[reading, listening] and output [writing, speaking]. There

should always be more student talking time than teacher

talking time. Teachers speak at the beginning of the class

to give directions and set the focus of the class, then set

up the activity for the class. Activities should end with

the students delivering negotiated aspects of a problem.

Teachers should always listen critically to student

presentations, pen in hand, writing down the words that

students mis-pronounce. After students have presented, the

teacher should then have students chorally join in the

simultaneous articulation of new or misperceived words.





Teachers should not correct students individually unless in

private; corrections should be implicit in choral unison.

All activities should conclude with either student writing

or oral presentation, or both if time permits. All students

should practice their presentation skills with short daily

presentations of information gleaned from the internet,

library books, or shared past experiences.

.

.

.

Listening Aspect

Scheduled Listening Exercises

Scheduled listening exercises should be a part of class

everyday. Listening activities that incorporate speakers of

other languages speaking English will be helpful to students

traveling abroad in the future or participating in

international meetings that are held in Kuwait in which

participants speak English. Vocabulary reinforcement should

automatically be included in these daily listening





activities. Daily applications of structured listening will

improve student learning, especially if it reinforces other

learning and is reinforced in other classes and other

mediums.

Dictation and spelling activities should be included

daily because they encourage critical analysis of details

and careful listening. The dictation should reinforce the

vocabulary and grammar learned in class. The grade should

come from accurate self-correction from students.

Formative Assessment and Self-evaluation

Formative Assessment in the form of offered criteria

checklists, quizzes, or comparisons with rubrics will

reinforce learning in non-stressing ways. Self-Evaluation

should be used regularly with a quantitative score applied

to an accurate qualitative self-assessment. These types of

assessments and evaluations will be extended to external

group evaluations by posing the questions: a) What went

well? b) What could have been better and how? c) What would

you have done differently? Applied to Daily Schedule, these





types of subtle, but critical evaluations will contribute to

creating a learning culture built on self-evaluation and

self-improvement in which the learners impressions,

attitudes, and perspectives are taken to the forefront.

Paranoia, be gone! Empowerment and confidence reign supreme.

An intrinsic learning environment builds professionalism.

Writing Aspect

Grammar, Spelling, and Vocabulary Reinforcement

Dictation, again, is a writing activity as well as a

listening activity that incorporates grammar, spelling, and

vocabulary reinforcement. A 100% score is achieved by

accurately checking all mistakes. This type of scoring

motivates students to look for details and empowers them in

that the reward is for self-correction and attention to

details.

First Draft Correction as Un-graded Critique

Quantitatively graded First Draft and qualitatively

graded Final Draft Activities serve to reward the learning

process, not penalize lack of perfection. All syndicates





need to improve their Writing, but learners should not be

ashamed of errors because errors are intrinsic to learning.

It is the correction of errors that creates learning.

Students of all ages take pride in self-correction. Self-

scoring and self-correction are ways to build student self-

esteem and save students from loss of face, which is

necessary in foreign language learning because of its

communicative nature.

Assessments

Formative Assessments

Formative Assessments focus on quantitative scoring and

are part of the daily scoring. Summative assessments are

qualitatively graded in transparent ways that elucidate the

scoring process by offering a criteria list or rubric or

both. Collaborative assessments are useful if they offer

constructive comments that direct the students toward

achieving a final product. A student-centered syllabus that

offers alternatives for achieving scores serves to make

choices available to students so that they take ownership in





what they choose, which intrinsically motivates them to set

their own goals and achieve them.

Summative Assessments

Summative Assessments and Cumulative Cycle Scoring will

be facilitated by the reinforcing activities undertaken by

students. If students are ranked each cycle based on

different criteria, then students can accept the change

based on their different abilities. Under this proposal, the

Summative Assessments are worth

Didactic Innovation and Teacher/Facilitator Professional Development

Pedagogical Consistency Addressed

How the program evolves will depend on the available

teaching talent. There are several possibilities that will

work; therefore, the prudence requires that the planning

stage be flexible. One possibility is that certain teachers

specialize in a particular aspect of the curriculum and

“float” to different classes to deliver that aspect of the

curriculum. Currently, the two technology teachers are

handling their part of the curriculum in this manner. One





teacher that does something for his classes that would

benefit all classes is the listening and viewing of the news

with discussion and analysis. This current events injection

into the program is done so with respect to foreign policy

and world events that is beneficial to officers preparing

for the international military course. Another possibility

is to manipulate the scheduling procedure as is deemed

necessary during the year. Regardless of who teaches to whom

when and how, at least one week of collaborative training is

necessary in order to make the teaching efforts uniform in

their accomplishments.

Curriculum Delivery and Scoring

Coordination of what teachers are teaching across the

syndicates is necessary for the integrity of the program.

Monitoring of student and teacher progress is necessary in

order to ensure that the officers are receiving the skills,

training, and knowledge in ways that are conducive to their

learning as well as consistent throughout the school. The





scoring must be implemented consistently in order to give

the program credibility.

Peer Observation Component for Reflective and Professional

Development

According to the research, teachers benefit from

observing other teachers for the purpose of reflecting on

their own teaching. Observing other instructors is

beneficial because teacher meta-cognitively analyze their

own instruction with the aim of incorporating the best of

what they see and eliminating what they deem as superfluous

or counterproductive either because they observe it and do

not like it, or they realize the absence or modification of

certain ritualistic behaviors of their own will be

beneficial.

Collegial Coaching for Curriculum Consistency and Thoroughness

Class visitations by those in supervisory positions

will be the norm in order to maintain communication with

teachers and students in order to respond to their needs.

The relationships among is all teachers, students, and





personnel must be explicitly congenial, helpful, and

altruistic in order to provide an atmosphere most concerned

with learning, skill improvement, and professional growth

and development for staff and students alike. All final

draft writing will be accomplished in the classroom in order

for students to receive the assistance they need.

Application of Assessment Standards

Assessment standards will be covered during teacher

training. The grading system ideally will be computerized;

however, a back-up system utilizing grade-books will be on

hand to supplement or insure consistency. Teachers can

utilize a variety of assessments that include quizzes,

essays, portfolio checking, presentation performance,

student self-evaluation, external peer group evaluation, or

a combination of these types of assessment for final student

evaluations.

Interviewing, Hiring, and Evaluating New Teachers

In this discussion, 11 questions serve as a model for

interviewing new teachers. The interview questions were a





synthesis of pedagogically oriented reading reflected in the

reference section. Two rubrics follow, first a formative

rubric, then a summative rubric. The purpose of this

discussion is to substantiate how these two rubrics serve as

instruments for achieving quality instruction from new

teachers, and how the interview questions reveal important

aspects of instruction and curriculum. The order of this

discussion is the derivation of: a) interview questions, b)

formative rubric, and c) summative rubric. The questions are

complex; therefore, the interviewees should have them in

writing to reduce individual stress levels and promote

complete and informative answers.

.

.

.

.

.

Discussion of Interview Question Formulation Rationale

Question One





The first question asks the interviewees to divulge

their purpose for wanting to teach by discussing their

personal philosophy. Gordon (2004) said that a quality

curriculum develops students holistically. The term macro-

pedagogically serves to inspire the interviewees to talk about

the many ways students learn. The question also invites a

discussion of theory (Marsh and Willis, 2003).

Question Two

The second question asks how interviewees plan their

instruction. Ornstein (1997) said that teachers plan in five

different levels, from one lesson to one year. Asking the

interviewee to differentiate the ideal situation serves to

reveal the attitudes of the potential hires concerning

flexibility, variety, structure, and routine. Planning must

demonstrate targets and methods of assessing achievement

(Stiggins, 1999). Inherently, planning should contain long-

range and short-range goals and measurements for achieving

those goals (Fuchs and Fuchs, 2001).

Question Three





The third question asks about classroom management.

Classroom management goes beyond rules and consequences. If

the interviewee does not talk about seating arrangements for

cooperative learning, then the interviewer will prompt by

mentioning intrapersonal, social-linguistic, and intrinsic

development in order to understand what strategies

incorporate these concepts (Gordon, 2004). Teachers need to

“create group buy-in” and “a bridge of interests” through

consensus building by having students decide class

management strategies (Watkins and Tisdell, 2006, p. 150).

Question Four

The third question asks how the new teacher will plan

from the first day of class concerning an inclusive,

student-centered, integrated curriculum (Gordon, 2004). For

a teacher to instruct in a student-centered manner, s/he

must understand individual learning styles, talents, and

abilities (Campanella, Ash, and Frith, 2003).

Differentiating instruction is essential because, as Beare

(2006) quoted Frankfurter, “there is no greater inequality





than treating unequals as equals” (p. 2 of 3). This

statement assumes a grouping of mixed ability students.

Question Five

The fifth question asks how the teacher will

incorporate instruction that is constructivist,

collaborative, varied, differentiated, and service-oriented

(Gordon, 2004). Constructivists encourage or provoke

autonomy and initiative (Marsh and Willis, 2003). Students

learn best by doing, not just listening (Tapscott, 1999).

Question Six

The sixth question asks how the teacher will

accommodate students with diverse needs. The interviewer

will prompt the teacher if the teacher does not mention the

Section 504 American Disabilities Act or the Individuals

with Disabilities Education Act (Sullivan, Lantz, and

Zirkel, 2000). According to Cooper and Jordan (2003),

schools should “embody egalitarian principles such as

democracy and maintenance of an equal opportunity social

structure” (p. 394).





Question Seven

The seventh question asks what teachers will do to

accessorize their instruction. The word accessorize entails

technological equipment, different delivery modes, and a

variety of supplemental material (Diamond, 1997).

Question Eight

The eighth question asks how the new teachers solved

problems in the past, and anticipate solving in the future

that require parental contact (Hargreaves, 2001). Another

interpretation of the word problem entails problem-solving.

Teachers must facilitate students proposing solutions to

problems, analyzing data, debating alternatives and values,

and developing and testing strategies (Levin and Riffel,

1998).

Question Nine

The ninth question asks for perspectives on formative

and summative assessments (Wiggin, 1993; Marsh and

Willis, 2003; Diamond, 1997).

Question Ten





The tenth question asks for “poignant questions

unanswered” and begins with “In reflection.” This prompt is

motivated by Gordon (2004), who devotes a chapter to

“reflective inquiry.” Most teachers want to know about the

organizational dynamics (Pajak, 2002). Inviting the

interviewee to question the interviewer is way to empower

the interviewer (Marsh and Willis, 2003).

Final Question

The final question asks for another question, but

toward the notion of professional development (Gordon,

2004). The interviewing teacher should know that

administrators are interested in teachers who want to

continue honing their didactic skills as life-long learners.

Pajak (2002) said that teachers learn best through

psychological interactions with supervisors.

Questions for Interviewing a New Teacher

A questionnaire for use in a new teacher interview follows

that includes a holistic philosophy and approach:





1. Can you please discuss with me your philosophy/theory

of education, how you feel about teaching from a macro-

pedagogical perspective, and/or what your greater

purpose is in the classroom and with the students

regarding student performance and learning outcomes?

2. How do you feel about planning, the way you plan, and

the way a teacher should plan lessons, units, quarters,

and semesters?

3. What is your view of classroom management, how do you

effectively manage a classroom, and what do you think

is ideal classroom management?

4. What will you do the first day of class, the first week

of classes, and the first month of classes concerning

an inclusive, student-centered, and integrated

curriculum?

5. How will you connect with your students and promote

their social and synergetic production with one another

through instruction that is student-centered,





constructivist, collaborative, varied, differentiated,

and inclusive?

6. How will you accommodate a classroom of diverse

learners with various needs and abilities from the

onset of classes and maintain these accommodations

throughout the duration of classes?

7. How will you select materials, technology, and

resources to enhance the curriculum and what materials

will you use to accessorize your teaching and to

facilitate learning and the learning outcomes of your

class?

8. What sorts of problems have you faced in the past or

anticipate in the future that might require you to call

a meeting with a supervisor?

9. What types of assessment have you used and will you

use, formative and summative, in order to understand

the effects and affect of your teaching practices on

your students and how does this impact the way you





evaluate the curriculum and your instructional delivery

of the curriculum?

10. In reflection, what issues have we discussed that

lead to poignant questions unanswered and which

important matter or matters have we not discussed to

your satisfaction?

11. What questions do you have; what are you most

curious about; and/or what would you like to ask

concerning professional development?

.

The rubrics and rubric rationales follow on subsequent

pages.

.

.

.

.

Formative Rubric Rationale

Student Needs





Knowledge of student needs demonstrates caring.

Noddings (1995) asserts that teacher caring is essential for

success with students. According to Glasser (1997), students

intrinsically need choices.

Cognitive Second Language Development

Cognitive restructuring occurs through social

interactions (Paolitto, 1977). According to Gong (2005),

“The essence of critical thinking is the combination of

critical thinking skills and the dispositions of fairness,

objectivity, impartiality, and nonarbitrariness” (p. 40).

Gong infers that this concept should be the foundation of

cognitive development.

Evidence of Student Growth

“Learning begins with student engagement, which in turn

leads to knowledge and understanding” (Shulman, 2002, p.

37). According to Sizer and Sizer (1999), students grow

substantially in a curriculum rich in content. The teacher

must implement a content rich environment of deeply engaged

students.





Instruction Aligned with Curriculum

Katz (2000) describes connecting content, concepts, and

subjects across the curriculum. Competent and proficient

teachers align course content and concepts with the

curriculum. Expert teachers align across the curriculum.

Authentic Formative Assessment

A repertoire of alternative assessment methods is

important. According to Jitendra, Rohena-Diaz, and Nolet

(1998), informal language assessments are essential for

linguistically diverse at-risk students. Teaching the

formalized language is a long slow process; meanwhile,

nurturing cognitive, affective, and psychomotor development

is achieved by not alienating students with overcorrection.

Summative Evaluations

The summative evaluation reveals data that demonstrates

the degree in which students have obtained a final goal

within the curriculum (Marsh and Willis, 2003). Teachers

must carefully record information concerning summative

evaluations.





Communication of Planning

Teachers must clearly communicate their expectations

(Jarrett, 2000-2001). Communication of planning should be

clearly visible in the classroom. Students should also

receive a learning-centered syllabus (Diamond, 1997); verbal

reminders prepare students for success.

Professional Growth

Planned professional development should include an

assortment of training, peer coaching, study groups, action

research, written reflection on teaching, teaching

partnerships, and more (Gordon, 2004).

Technology Incorporated into Instruction

Teachers should include in their planning the

technology options available to them as they design their

instruction of the curriculum (Diamond, 1997).

Affective Domain

Richmond and Cummings (2004) said:

“As individuals advance in awareness of others’

thoughts and feelings about moral issues, they will





naturally practice virtues that reflect awareness of and

concern for human well being, which is a necessary

foundation of civil society and required for moral

participation in a diverse global community” (p. 204).

The inference by Richmond and Cummings is that a

teacher who brings students together to discuss sensitive

issues will facilitate the bonding of the group. The group

will then emulate caring and thoughtful behavior toward one

another, which an observer will witness as evidence for

promoting the development of the affective domain (Gunter,

Estes, and Schwab, 2003).

Psychomotor Domain

According to Greene (1995), the arts nurture and

provoke [intellectual] growth and inventiveness. Second

language learning is an art, which requires movement and

imagination. Gunter, Estes, and Schwab (2003) list

Readiness, Observation, Perception, Response, and Adaptation

as a proposed taxonomy for the psychomotor domain of





developmental learning, which includes second language

development.

Student Reflection

Portfolios of student work can include student

reflections on learning as well as serving as evidence for

an evaluator (Hargreaves, 2001). Shulman (2002) said that

critical reflection leads to higher-order thinking.

Meta-cognitive Analysis

According to Klein (2001), Eisner and Valiance

identified the conceptions of cognitive processes, self-

actualization, social reconstruction, and academic

rationalism, which entail learning outcomes. These critical

thinking skills should be transferred to students with

milieu appropriate intellectual strategies.

Evidence of Collaborative Instruction

Collaborative projects serve as evidence of cooperative

learning for the evaluator as well as for the visiting

parent (Hargreaves, 2001). Creative chaos may be inherent to

collaborative problem-solving (Palmer, 1997). Samples of





collaborative student work should be clearly visible in the

room, when circumstantially appropriate.

Stages of Teacher Development

The stages of teacher development include (Jarrett,

2000-2001):

Novice Stage of survival and discovery;

Advanced Beginner Stage of experimentation and

consolidation;

Competent Stage of mastery and stabilization;

Proficient Stage of analysis and deliberation;

Expert Stage of fluidity and flexibility (Slide #5,

PowerPoint).

.

Summative Rubric Rationale

Change in Perspective

The difference between the Formative Rubric and the

Summative Rubric is the perspective. The Formative Rubric is

in process. The Summative Rubric is the final assessment of





the term; the summative rubric reflects over the course as a

completed endeavor.

Open Spaces for Comments and Attachments

The Summative Rubric has open space for the evaluator

to write brief notes or summon the reader of the rubric to

the correct location on the attachment in order to read

helpful, encouraging feedback.

Overall Evaluation of Teacher Performance

The overall evaluation praises the teacher for what the

teacher did well and encourages the teacher in that

attention to certain issues will improve teacher performance

and self-satisfaction. Evaluated teachers who are given “a

voice in designing and implementing change,” will cooperate

in altering “their working patterns” (Ornstein, 1990, p.

117).

Formative Rubric for Informal Criterion-referenced

Assessment of Newly Hired Teachers in the Process of

Acquiring Expertise in Instructional Delivery of Curriculum





Proficiency Matrix for Formative Assessment

Noble Novice

Progressing to Competency

Competency Achieved

Proficiency Established

Evidence of Expertise

Knowledge of StudentNeeds

Signs of effortsto know

Some evidenceof knowing

Written or SpokenEvidence

Written and Spoken Evidence

ExtensiveKnowledge

Knowledge of CurriculumStandards,Indicators, Goals, Objectives

Not posted,not mentioned

Posted or mentioned

Posted and mentioned

Various forms ofevidence

Thoroughly communicated in every way

Knowledge of ContentArea

Not demon-strated

Content mentioned

Demonstrated


Extensive

Addresses Cognitive Development Needs

Not imple-mented

Some evidence

Evidence observed

Lots of evidence

Students demonstrate that they are well-served

Evidence of StudentGrowth

No studentwork posted

Some evidence

Posted and demonstrated

Plethoraof evidence

Detailed Progression of ExtensiveEvidence

Instruction Aligned with Curriculum

Not observed

Some connection

Several Connections

Good Examples

PerfectlyAligned

Evidence of Authentic

Not observed

Mentioned

Observed Lots of Evidence

Profusionof Systemati





Formative Assessment

cally developedevidence

Satisfactory Summative Evaluations

Not mentioned

Mentioned

Volunteered

Files ofEvidence

Well-placed & abundant evidence

Evidence of Planning Communicated to Students

Nothingposted or written

Something Posted

Posted and Demonstrated

Evidenceof GoodOrganization

Extremelydetailed,students know exactly

ClassroomManagement

Rules? Rules Posted

Respect in Place

System well in place

Exemplary in every way

Evidence of the Pursuit of Professional Growth

Not noticed

Mentioned Evidence Volunteered


Excellent Examples of Application

Use of Technology

Chalk or marker

Attempted Demonstrated

Proficient

Skilled inmany ways

Addressing AffectiveDomain ofDevelopment

No interaction

Students Grouped

Students interacting

Studentspurposefully involved

All Students interacting to fulfill goals

Addressing Psychomotor Needs

Students stationary

Some Movement

Students act purposefully

System well in place

Enthusiastically Demonstrated





of StudentsEvidence of Student Reflection on Learning

Not observed

Mentioned Posted orshared

Files ofEvidence

Well organized

Evidence of Student Meta-cognitiveAnalysis

Not observed

Mentioned Posted orVolunteered to Share

Files ofEvidence

Progression of good examples

Evidence of Collaborative Learning

Not observed

Some Interaction

Demonstrated

Lots of Evidence

Excellent Creative Examples

Stages of Teacher DevelopmentExemplify:

Survival and Discovery

Experimen-tation and Consolidation

Mastery and Stabilization

Analysis and Deliberation

Flexible, Harmonious, Resilient, Fluid

.

.

.Summative Rubric for the Formal Norm-referenced Summative

Assessment of Newly Hired Teachers

Summative Matrix for Teacher Evaluation

Needs to Improve:Skills/Knowledge/PerformanceComments may follow.

Satisfactory Performance/ Skills/ Knowledge

Exceeds Expectations

All Student Needs Met





All Aspects of Curriculum Implemented

Space for hand written notes or referral to an attachment with paragraph number mentioned.

Content Fully Delivered toAchieve Maximum Student PotentialCognitive Domain Implemented to Achieve Critical Thinking OutcomesStudent Growth Achieved in Skills and KnowledgeAlignment ofCurriculum &InstructionAuthentic Formative Assessments ImplementedSummative Evaluations Appropriately Implemented





& CommunicatedThorough Planning Communicatedto Students & DepartmentClassroom Managed to Achieve BestPossible Outcomes

Professional Development PursuedTechnology Used to Enhance TeachingDomain of Affective Development Fully ExercisedPsychomotor DevelopmentalNeeds of Students MetStudent Reflection onLearning ExemplifiedStudent Meta-cognitive Evaluations Recorded





Cooperative Learning Fully Implemented to Achieve SynergyOverall Evaluation ofTeacher Performance

An attachment to the summative rubric explains the strengths

of the teacher and encourages the teacher concerning what

goals to strive for in the upcoming year.

.

.

.

Summary of the Teacher Hiring Interviews and Evaluation

This discussion developed 11 questions designed to

interview new teachers for hire. These 11 questions are in

the first appendix immediately following the reference

section. This writer substantiated the development of the

interview questions. Nest, rationales explained the

development of a Formative Rubric and a Summative Rubric.





Both rubrics were designed to evaluate new teachers, or for

new teachers to self-evaluate. These two rubrics follow the

hiring questions in the appendix section of this paper.

.

Summarization of the Proposed Systemic Renovation

This proposal began by discussing classroom management,

which will be enhanced by daily accountability of students

for assigned work by the implementation of a scoring

methodology that strategically rewards performance,

perseverance, effort, and cooperation, which will motivate

learning. High-stakes testing will be eliminated via a new

scoring structure; meanwhile, testing will become user-

friendly, transparent, and accommodating to the learning

process. Rubrics will assist in consistency across the

syndicates and be shared among teachers and students in

order for complete understanding of the scoring technique to

be understood by all.

Each cycle will have a different skill function focus.

All skills will be addressed every cycle and every skill





will be the focus of one period per day; however, all skills

will be reinforced any given period: the difference is that

the focus will change. The purpose of this implementation is

to make certain that every skill is being synchronically

developed, which will enhance students’ abilities every

month for the summative evaluations – the cycle exams.

The difference in the student texts and workbooks is

that cross-referencing glossaries and indices will assist

learners and activities will be included in the texts to

offer consistency across the curriculum. There will also be

a grammar component with its own separate period. Grammar

must be taught with controlled gap-filled exercises after

explanation and exemplification; the next step is the

allowance for creative sentence making in written and spoken

form from components, questions, and answers in which the

questions must be constructed.

The listening aspect will be taught by utilizing the

news. These current events will be offered to all of the





syndicates. If subtitled film can be located, then this

strategy will also be implemented.

The reading aspect should follow the listening aspect,

but preceding the listening aspect is another option.

Optimally, decoding, which is reading and listening, will

precede encoding, which is writing and speaking. Grammar

should take place in the schedule during the input phase in

the morning.

The writing aspect will offer opportunities to write

during class. All first drafts will be written in class and

score quantitatively to award the amount of effort put

forth. Only the final draft will be qualitatively scored.

This system allows for fairness in the mixed ability

classroom.

The speaking aspect is normally the final classwork of

the day and is meant to reinforce what occurred during the

day and function as the final formative assessment for the

day. The teacher will find out what pronunciation needs





teaching as well as what information points and grammar,

writing, and reading needs to be reinforced.

References

Aarts, F. (1991). Lexicography and syntax: The state of the art in learner’s dictionaries. In Georgetown University Round Table on Languages and Linguistics 1991; Linguistics and Language Pedagogy: The state of the art, pp. 567-582. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.

Amrein, A., & Berliner, D. (2002). High-stakes testing, uncertainty, and student learning. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 10 (18), 1-76. Retrieved February 3, 2006 from UOP.

Anyon, J. (1980, February). Social class and the hidden curriculum of work. Journal of Education, 162 (1), 67-93. Retrieved on January 5, 2006 from UOP.

Avolio, B., Bass, B. & Jung, D. (1999). Re-examining the components of transformational and transactional leadership using the multifactor leadership questionnaire. Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology, 4 (72), 441-462.

Bagayoko, D., Kelley, E. & Hasan, S. (2000). Problem-SolvingParadigm. College Teaching, 48, 24-31. Retrieved September 15,2005, from Info Trac OneFile database.

Banerji, P., & Krishnan, V. (2000). Ethical preferences of transformational leaders: An empirical investigation. Leadership & Organization Development Journal, 21 (8), 405.

Bass, B., & Steidlmeier, P. (1999). Ethics, character, and authentic transformational leadership behavior. Binghamton:





Binghamton University. Retrieved November 29, 2005 from: http://cls.binghamton.edu/BassSteid.html.

Beare, P. (2006, February 4). Better schools? Let’s get ready to rumble. The Fresno Bee, p. B9. Retrieved February 21, 2006 from ProQuest database.

Bell, T. (2005). Behaviors and attitudes of effective foreign language teachers: Results of a questionnaire study.Foreign Language Annals, Proquest

Bergmann, H., Hurson, K. & Russ-Eft (1999). Introducing a grass-roots model of leadership. Strategy & Leadership, 27 (6), 15-20. Retrieved September 27, 2005, from ProQuest database.

Campanella, M., Ash, A, and Frith, M. (2003). Translating vision into practice: Kelvin Grove State College MiddleSchool. Primary & Middle Years Educator, 1 (1), 3-7. Retrieved March 25, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.

Chapman, R. ed. (1992). Roget’s International Thesaurus (5th ed.). New York: HarperCollins Publishers.

Clarke, P. (2000). Teaching controversial issues. Green Teacher, 62, 29-32. Retrieved September 15, 2005, from ProQuest database.

Cook, K. (2002). Layered literacies: A theoretical frame fortechnical communication pedagogy. Technical Communication Quarterly, 11 (1), 5-29. Utah State University.

Cooper, R., & Jordan, W. (2003). Cultural issues in comprehensive school reform. Urban Education, 38 (4), 380-397. Retrieved on January 5, 2006 from UOP.



http://cls.binghamton.edu/BassSteid.html



Copeland, D., & Radvansky, G. (2004). Working memory and syllogistic reasoning. The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology, 57A, (8), 1437-1457.

Curral, S., Hammer, T., Baggett, L., & Doniger, G. (1999). Combining qualitative and quantitative methodologies to study group processes: An illustrative study of a corporate board of directors. Organizational Research Methods, 2 (1), 5-36. Retrieved June 2, 2006 from Sage Publications database.

Davis, M. (2006). Bill pushes rigorous curricula. Education Week, 25 (1), 1-2. Retrieved on February 15, 2006 from ProQuest database.

De Corte, E., Verschaffel, L., & Van De Ven, A. (2001). Improving text comprehension strategies in upper primary school children: A design experiment. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 531-559. Retrieved June 25, 2006from EBSCOhost database.

Dewey, J. (1997). Experience and education. New York: TouchstoneBooks.

Diamond, R. (1997). Designing and assessing courses and curricula: A practical guide. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Retrieved February26, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resources.

Dijk, T., & Kintsch, W. (1983). Strategies of discourse comprehension. London: Academic Press.

D’Souza, B. (2005). A quantitative analysis of the effectiveness of literature response circles in improving the language acquisition of English as second language learners. (Doctoral dissertation, Capella University, 2005). Retrieved June 2, 2006 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, UMI: 3187622.





Duffy, M. (2001). A critique of cultural education in nursing. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 36 (4), 487.

Eco, U. (1977). The influence of Roman Jakobson on the development of semiotics. In Roman Jakobson: Echoes of his scholarship, pp. 39-58. London: Peter d’Ridder Press.

Eco, U. (1984). Semiotics and the philosophy of language. London: MacMillan Press.

Facella, M., Rampino, K., & Shea, E. (2005). Effective teaching strategies for English language learners. BilingualResearch Journal, 29 (1), 209-224.

Ford, R., & Scandura, T. (2005). Garbage-in, garbage-out: Item generation as a threat to construct validity. Southern Management Association 2005 meeting: Outstanding papers; Research methods best paper. Retrieved on November 10, 2005 from the World Wide Web via Google search engine.

Fried, V., ed. (1972). The Prague School of Linguistics and Language Teaching. London: Oxford University Press.

Fuchs, L., & Fuchs, D. (2001). Curriculum-based assessment of progress toward long-term and short-term goals. The Journalof Special Education, 20 (1), 69-80. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Fuente, M. (2006). Classroom L2 vocabulary acquisition: Investigating the role of pedagogical tasks and form-focusedinstruction. Language Teaching Research, 10 (3), 263. Retrieved June 19, 2006 from ProQuest database.

Gates, B. (2005-2006, December – February). The new road ahead; How intelligent agents and mind-mappers are taking our information democracy to the next stage. Newsweek SpecialEdition.





Giroux, H. (1992, Summer). Language, difference, and curriculum theory: Beyond the politics of clarity. Theory into Practice, 31 (3), 219-227. Oxford: Pergamon Press.

Glasser, W. (1997). A new look at school failure and school success. Phi Delta Kappan, 78 (8), 596-603. Retrieved February 24, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Gong, R. (2005). The essence of critical thinking. Journal of Developmental Education, 28 (3), 40. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Gordon, S. (2004). Professional development for school improvement: Empowering learning communities. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Retrieved February 26, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resources.

Greene, M. (1995). Art and imagination. Phi Delta Kappan, 76 (5), 378-383. Retrieved February 24, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Grice, H. (1991). Utterer’s meaning, sentence-meaning, and word-meaning. In Pragmatics, pp. 65-76. London: Oxford University Press.

Gunter, M., Estes, T., & Schwab, J. (2003). Instruction: A modelsapproach (4th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education, Inc. Retrieved February 26, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resources.

Gutek, G. (1997). Philosophical and ideological perspectives on education (2nd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hill.

Hargreaves, A. (2001). Beyond anxiety and nostalgia. Phi DeltaKappan, 82 (5), 373-378. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOPElectronic Reading Resource.





Harrison, B. (1999, January). The nature of leadership: Historical perspectives & the future. Journal of California Law Enforcement, 33 (1), 24-30. Retrieved September 27, 2005, fromProQuest database.

Hatch, T., Bass, R., Iiyoshi, T., & Mace, D. (2004). Building knowledge for teaching and learning. Change, 36 (5),42-49. Retrieved on February 3, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.

Holly, T. (2004). Analyzing the effectiveness of reading intervention strategies on reading achievement in an urban West Tennessee school district. (Doctoral dissertation, Union University, 2004). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, UMI: 3147074.

Huang, L. (2004). A little bit goes a long way: The effects of raising awareness of strategy use on advanced adult second language learners’ strategy use and oral production. (Doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, 2004). ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, ISBN: 0-612-91605-7.

Huba, M., & Freed, J. (2000). Learner-centered assessment on college campuses: Shifting the focus from teaching to learning. New York: Allyn & Bacon. Retrieved on February 26, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resources.

Jarrett, G. (2000-2001). Teacher performance appraisal instrument-revised (TPAI-R) supplemental training materials.Professional Personnel Evaluation Ad Hoc Committee, School Support Section, Division of School Business, NC Department of Public Instruction. Retrieved March 8, 2006 from theWorld Wide Web at:

http://www.ncpublicschools.org/evalpsemployees/teacherevaluations.ppt







Jitendra, A., Rohena-Diaz, E., & Nolet, V. (1998). A dynamiccurriculum-based language assessment: Planning instruction for special needs students. Preventing School Failure, 42 (4), 182-186. Retrieved March 29, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.

Johnson, Jr., R. (2002). Decision theory and analysis. Futurics, 26 (1/2), 67-91. Retrieved September 15, 2005, from ProQuest database.

Juliebo, M., Malicky, G., & Norman, C. (1998). Metacognitionof young readers in an early intervention programme. Journalof Research in Reading, 21 (1), 24-35. Retrieved June 25, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.

Katz, S. (2000). Competency, epistemology and pedagogy: Curriculum’s holy trinity. The Curriculum Journal, 11 (2), 133-144. Retrieved March 25, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.

Kim, J. (2005). A community within the classroom: Dialogue journal writing of Adult ESL learners. Adult Basic Education,

Kirkpatrick, B. (1985). A lexicographical dilemma: Monolingual dictionaries for the native speaker and forthe learner. In Dictionaries, lexicography, and language learning, pp. 7- 13.

Klein, M. (2001). Alternative curriculum conceptions and designs. Theory into Practice, 25 (1), 31-35. Retrieved from UOPElectronic Reading Resource.

Krashen, S. (1991). The Input Hypothesis: An update. Georgetown University Roundtable on Languages and Linguistics; Linguistics and language pedagogy: The state ofthe art, pp. 409-431. Washington, DC: Georgetown University Press.





Levin, B., & Riffle, J. (1998). Conceptualising school change. Cambridge Journal of Education, 28 (1), 113-127. Retrieved February 1, 2006 from ProQuest database.

Leech, G. (1984). Principles of pragmatics. London: Longman Group.

Luelsdorff, P., ed. (1994). The Prague School of structural and functional linguistics. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Lyons, J. (1977). Semantics I & II. London: Cambridge UniversityPress.

Macaro, E., & Masterman, L. (2006). Does the intensive explicit grammar instruction make all the difference? Language Teaching Research, 10 (3), 297. Retrieved June 19, 2006 from ProQuest database.

Martin, W. (1985). Reflections on learner’s dictionaries. InSymposium on Lexicography II, pp. 169-182. Tubingen: Max Niemeyer Verlag.

Marsh, C., & Willis, G. (2003). Curriculum: Alternative approaches, ongoing issues (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Retrieved February 26, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resources.

Mertler, C. (2001). Designing scoring rubrics for your classroom. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 7 (25). Retrieved April 8, 2006 from: http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=25

Miller, C. (2006). Developmental relationships between language and theory of mind. American Journal of Speech – Language Pathology, 15, 142-154. Retrieved June 19, 2006 from ProQuest database.



http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=7&n=25



Nodding, N. (1995). Teaching themes of care. Phi Delta Kappan, 76 (9), 675-670. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Norris, W. & Vecchio, R. (1992, September). Situational leadership theory: A replication. Group & Organization Management, 17 (3), 331-340. Retrieved September 27, 2005, from Info Trac OneFile database.

Nuyts, J. (1992). Aspects of a cognitive-pragmatic theory of language; Oncognition, functionalism, and grammar. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Ornstein, A. (1997). How teachers plan lessons. High School Journal, 80 (4), 227-238. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOPElectronic Reading Resource.

Pajak, E. (2002). Clinical supervision and psychological functions: A new direction for theory and practice. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 17 (3), 189-205. Retrieved from

UOP Reading Resource.

Palmer, P. (1997). The heart of a teacher. Change, 29 (6), 14-22. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Paolitto, D. (1977). The role of the teacher in moral education. Theory into Practice, 16 (2), 73- 77. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Podsakoff, P. & MacKenzie, S. (1997, Summer). Kerr and Jermier’s substitutes for leadership model: Background, empirical assessment, and suggestions for future research. Leadership Quarterly, 8 (2), 117-133. Retrieved September 27, 2005, from Business Source Premier database.





Portes, A. (1998). Social capital: Its origins and applications in modern sociology. Annual Reviews Sociology, 24, 1-24.

Reiterer, S., Berger, M., Hemmelmann, C., & Rappelsberger, P. (2005). Decreased EEG coherence between prefrontal electrodes: A correlate of high language proficiency. Experimental Brain Research, 163 (1), 109. ProQuest database.

Richmond, A., & Cummings, R. (2004). In support of the cognitive-development approach to moral education: A response to David Carr. Journal of Moral Education, 33 (2), 197-205. Retrieved March 25, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Rolstad, K., Mahoney, K., & Glass, G. (2005). The big picture: A meta-analysis of program effectiveness research on English language learners. Educational Policy, 19 (4), 572-594. Retrieved June 25, 2006 from SAGE Publications database.

Rowland, M. (2005). Information literacy standards and the core content standards – Finding the links. CSLA [California School Library Association] Journal, 28 (2), 27-29. Retrieved March 26, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.

Rowley, D., & Sherman, H. (2003). The special challenges of academic leadership. Management Decision, 41 (10), 1058.

Rubric links (n.d.). Retrieved March 8, 2006 from the World Wide Web at: http://www.shambles.net/pages/staff/rubrics/

Sack, J. (2005). NCATE approves single cutoff score on teacher tests. Education Week, 25 (11), 3-18. Retrieved on February 3, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.



http://www.shambles.net/pages/staff/rubrics/



Schein, E. (2001). Organizational culture and leadership. InClassics of Organization Theory. Fort Worth: Harcourt College Publishers.

Schneider, R. (2004, March). A test too far. Observer, 242, 20-21. Retrieved on February 3, 2006 from EBSCOhost database.

Searle, J. (1991). Indirect speech acts. In Pragmatics, pp. 265-277. London: Oxford University Press.

Shealley, M. (2006). The promise and perils of scientifically based research for urban schools. Urban Education, 41 (1), 5-19. Retrieved on January 4, 2006 from SAGE Publications database.

Sheen, R., & O’Neill, R. (2005). Tangled up in form: Critical comments on ‘Teachers’ stated beliefs about Incidental Focus on Form and their Classroom Practices’ by Basturkmen, Loewen, and Ellis. Applied Linguistics, 26 (2), 268.

Shulman, L. (2002). Making differences. Change, 34 (6), 36-45. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Sizer, T., & Sizer, N. (1999). Grappling. Phi Delta Kappan, 81 (3), 184-191. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Slavin, R., & Cheung, A. (2005). A synthesis of research on language instruction for English language learners. Review of Educational Research, 75 (2), 247-285. ProQuest.

Stiggins, R. (1999). Assessment, student conficence, and school success. Phi Delta Kappan, 81(3), 191-199. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.





Stern, A. (2005-2006, January-February). The global union; The split we engineered in America’s oldest and largest labor confederation was small news compared with our real goal: The creation of a world union. Newsweek Special Edition.

Sullivan, K., Lantz, P., & Zirkel, P. (2000, Winter). Leveling the playing field or leveling the players?: Section504, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and interscholastic sports. The Journal of Special Education, 33 (4), 258-268. Retrieved on February 10, 2006 from ProQuest database.

Tapscott, D. (1999, February). Educating the net generation.Educational Leadership, 5, 6-11. Retrieved February 27, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Tobin, Y., ed. (1988). The Prague School and its legacy in linguistics, literature, semiotics, folklore, and the arts. Amsterdam: John Benjamins Publishing Company.

Verstegen, D., & McGuire, K. (1991). The dialectic of reform. Educational Policy, 5 (4), 386- 411. Retrieved on January 30, 2006 from SAGE Social Science Collections.

Vinger, K. (2004). Factors associated with teacher attrition and retention in south Texas: A comparative study by certification program. (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Houston, 2004). Retrieved on January 8, 2006 from ProQuest Dissertations and Theses, ID# AAT 3137858.

Watkins, B., & Tisdell, E. (2006). Negotiating the labyrinthfrom margin to center: Adult degree program administrators as program planners within higher education institutions. Adult Education Quarterly, 56 (2), 134-159. RetrievedMarch 17, 2006 from SAGE Publications database.





Weiskittel, P. (1999). The concept of leadership. ANNA Journal, 26 (5), 467-470. Retrieved September 27, 2005, from ProQuest database.

Wiggin, S. (1993). Assessing student performance: Exploring the purpose and limits of testing. SanFrancisco: Jossey-Bass. Retrieved February 26, 2006 from UOP Electronic Reading Resource.

Wren, D. (2004). The evolution of management thought. New York: John Wiley and Sons.



Curriculum Renovation

Documents