The Student Teacher Literacy Project.

The Student Teacher Literacy Project provided training for university student teachers completing their clinical experiences in inclusionary classrooms, Grades 1 through 5. Twenty-one student teachers received eight, two-hour training sessions over a 15 week period. The participants indicated the training sessions sharpened teaching strategies for promoting literacy when connected to a literature-based program. The program was aligned to the state/district curriculum mandates. The benefits of training, resources, and technology exchanges assisted them in assessment procedures, learning centers, portfolio implementation, and inter-disciplinary experiences. They stated a desire for additional training in assessment (for portfolios and determining individual reading levels) and classroom library development. All trainees stated more skill acquisition for use in the inclusionary classroom and felt better prepared for professional employment.

Various philosophies have swept the elementary grades for influencing the way children should be taught to read and write (Willis, 1995). In fact, "national attention has been focused on the problem of teaching elementary students to read" (Curriculum Update, 2000, p.2). One author (Soundy, 1997, p. 153) notes when instructors know quality children' s literature and are familiar with significant children's books the "creation of rich literacy environments helps all participants become part of a reading community." Further, children's books and activities that are used can foster literacy development (Baumann, Hooten & White, 1999) and enhance abilities (Barclay, Benelli, and Schoon, 1999). It is also recognized that this approach to teaching "can improve the academic performance of learning disabled students" as it "respects a student's individuality and makes literature an experience rather than a learning tool" (Fuhler, 1993, p. 1). Thus, student teachers need to know how to be instrumental in implementing effective classroom practices that help learners be successful readers and writers.

Purpose of the Study

The Student Teacher Literacy Project (funded by the Pennsylvania Department of Education Higher Education Initiative) provided literacy training and resources for student teachers to increase support services for children with literacy needs in inclusionary settings. A partnership between Bloomsburg University and Berwick Area Elementary Schools (with 21 cooperating teachers from the five elementary schools) was developed because the school district had adopted the literature-based approach (after pilot testing the reading program the previous academic year) and because of the increase of children needing adapted support services in reading and writing. The purpose of this study was to evaluate eight, two-hour training sessions over a period of 15 weeks for 21 student teachers during their clinical experiences in inclusionary settings. This partnership was unique as student teachers acquired: (1) an increased knowledge base about implementing various reading/writing strategies to a broad spectrum of students according to state standards and district curriculum mandates; (2) a vernacular about ways to promote literacy through "chunking," graphic organizers," literacy portfolios," technology usage,"and "flex grouping" while connecting it to children's literature, and (3) an increased knowledge about assessment techniques for each individual child including teacher developed rubrics and other performance-based means of measurement.

Methodology

This study investigated student teachers' skills and knowledge base for teaching reading in inclusionary settings before and after training intervention during their clinical experiences. The population for the study was twenty-one student teachers from Bloomsburg University, Bloomsburg, Pennsylvania. As elementary majors, the population consisted of 16 females and 5 males. The student teachers were seniors completing their academic program. They had two courses in the teaching of reading, one course in diagnostic reading, one course in exceptionalities, and one in assessment on the undergraduate level. A survey instrument was developed by an administrator and three faculty members within the designated school district. For validation of the survey instrument, six faculty members from a different school district were sent a cover letter explaining the purpose of the study and the initialdraft of the questionnaire. Comments and suggestions from the jury were incorporated. To determine the appropriateness of the content, the procedure used by McCaslin and Walker (1979) was implemented. They recommend content validity be assessed by having experts in the field "review and rate" the questions (p. 34). They suggest a panel ranging from three to nine authorities as the desired approach. Three university faculty members, within the Bloomsburg University Elementary Education Department, were used as the panel. The questionnaire then was administered to a sample of five elementary major student teachers. Their suggestions and comments were utilized to make content changes. When the instrument was approved, it was administered to twenty-one student teachers the first day of their student teaching experience as well as the the last day--after they had completed the eight training sessions.

The 25 questions were designed to obtain the data needed to achieve the purpose of the study. The questions sought to determine the participants' skills and knowledge of teaching reading/writing to a broad spectrum of students--from the children with disabilities to gifted according to state standards/district curriculum mandates. The information obtained would assist the university with its curriculum design and future training sessions for continuation of the literacy project.

Data Analysis

The study used descriptive statistics to analyze the data from the surveys. Frequencies were used to interpret the responses. The open-ended questions were analyzed by placing the information into categories. Direct quotes, through a summary, were used to explain the data.

Findings

University students expressed an increased understanding of the myriad of teaching strategies needed to promote literacy. Students especially expressed their increased knowledge base for the adaptations needed (to measure the levels of students), the significance of the Pennsylvania System of State Assessments and district curriculum mandates, assessment techniques (including more performance-based means as student teachers designed their own rubrics to be aligned with the PSSA's standards), portfolio implementation, the available resources, and ways to implement effective learning centers. The survey showed that while university students showed knowledge in theory, some had difficulty in connecting theory to application about how to use proper assessment procedures when portfolios are in place (other than just using portfolios as a means of collection). Overall, the data revealed information around these areas:

1. Benefits of the Training Sessions

Based on the survey, students recognized the need for implementing the constructivist theory for teaching reading. "Build on what they know as you make it more difficult" was one participant's statement. Emphasis from the training indicated how to implement writing strategies in response to literature-based reading. These strategies included journal writing, poetry, short summaries, and various modes of reflection--be it through illustrations or story comprehension. The steps of the writing process became more significant in their teaching experiences. They recognized how to utilize questioning, learning centers, self-reflections, study buddies, journals, predictions, guided practice, and vocabulary enhancement to increase a balanced literature program. As one participant stated, "I enjoyed learning about how to create a learning center and writing center using household materials. I learned how to make them personal and interesting to students using pictures/shaped tablets for writing." Another stated, "I learned it is not a good idea to use writing as a punishment."

2. Impact of Resources

The data indicated the student teachers utilized the resources given at the training sessions. One student teacher stated, "I enjoyed receiving materials I could use in the classroom. The children enjoyed using them, and I learned a lot from using them." Another commented, "I liked the new ideas about literacy and ways to improve and incorporate older ideas I have either experienced as a student myself or heard about in my classes."

3. Electronic Retrievals

Students recognized how they could use the Internet/ERIC for lesson plans and thematic units to be aligned with curriculum/state standards. A student commented, "Get on the Internet and print." Another stated, "The websites provided a shared knowledge base in addition to the resources on graphic organizers and for ways of coming up with ways to help students understand information being taught. The importance of KWL charts, presentations, and story mapping are ways to have students connect with the literature."

4. Connecting Literature to Learning Across the Curriculum

Relating the books/novels to other content areas was recognized. "Encourage writing responses to other subject readings" was recognized by many. "Utilize the multiple intelligences to help students connect to other areas by using student-generated mobiles, models, and oral presentations."

5. The Classroom Library

The 21 elementary teachers demonstrated the dire need to develop an effective classroom library. Trainees made suggestions to find ways to improve future training with an emphasis on the classroom libraries. An overwhelming majority suggested that more ways be developed for teachers to improve these areas. As one university student commented, "In the bookcases are many books, but the students do not utilize the library because they are too hard to get to, unorganized, and all of the books are on the shelf spine out. Most are so thin you cannot tell what they are by the spine. The classroom library should be more appealing." These aspects should be covered during future training sessions.

6. Various Modes of Assessment

The university students developed a deeper understanding of the analysis and diagnosis of children with reading maladies through classroom measurements. The need for measuring student learning (through performance means as well as traditional means) became a shared language of emphasis. Training sessions on specific ways to determine student reading levels and training in Qualitative Reading Inventories were recommended.

Summary

Literacy continues to impact every aspect of the classroom, school, community, and society. In order for teachers to implement effective classroom practices to help learners be successful and productive readers/writers of society, continued quality training should be provided for in university curricula and clinical experiences. The Student Teacher Literacy Project (funded by the Pennsylvania Department of Education--Higher Education Initiative) enabled university student teachers to enhance their knowledge and skills as related to literacy promotion through training programs. Integrated into the training were state standards, current lexicon and practices, portfolio implementation, technology usage, and assessment procedures (rubrics) for assessing student learning. The student teachers indicated the training sessions benefited them and motivated them to recognize reading maladies, use the Internet, adapt strategies when students were not succeeding, and how to do this while maintaining the dignity of each student.

Another aspect of the training occurred as the university students conversed with their colleagues about ways that others discovered/communicated how students learned. All trainees indicated that they would attend training sessions weekly (instead of bi-weekly) to improve the love of learning to read, write, spell, listen, and speak as literacy encompasses all of these aspects. All trainees indicated they were better prepared for professional employment in the classroom because of the Student Teacher Literacy Project.

References

Allington, R. et. al. (1995). Patterns of implementation of literature-based curriculum. Albany, NY: National Research Center on Literature Teaching and Learning. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 386731).

Barclay, K., Benelli, C. & Schoon, S. (1999). Making the connection! Childhood Education, 75(3), 146-152.

Baumann, J. F., Hooten, H. & White, P. (1999). Teaching comprehension through literature: A teacher research project to develop fifth graders' reading strategies and motivation. The Reading Teacher, 53(1), 38-50.

Curriculum Update. (Summer 2000). Before it's too late: Giving reading a last chance. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Dickinson, D. K. & DiGisi, L.L.(1998). The many rewards of a literacy rich classroom. Educational Leadership, 55(6), 23-26.

Fuhler, C.J. (1993). The learning disabled adolescent and whole language. The Clearing House, 67(2), 107-115.

Gipe, J.P., et. al (1993). Literacy growth of urban "at-risk" children taught by university students using literature-based instruction. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service ED 364832).

McCaslin, N. L. & Walker, J. P. (1979). Career education measurement handbooks. Columbus, Ohio: National Center for Research in Education.

Soundy, C. S. (1997). Nurturing literacy with inflants and toddlers in group settings. Childhood Education, 73(3), 149-153.

Dr. Viola Supon, Associate Professor, Bloomsburg University.

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Dr. Viola Supon, Associate Professor, Bloomsburg University, Bloomsburg, PA 17815. E-mail: [e-mail]