Author: drcowinj

Dr. Jasmin (Bey) Cowin, an Associate Professor at Touro University, received the 2024 Touro University CETL Faculty Fellowship for Excellence in Teaching and the Rockefeller Institute of Government awarded her the prestigious Richard P. Nathan Public Policy Fellowship (2024-2025). As a Fulbright Scholar and SIT Graduate, she was selected to be a U.S. Department of State English Language Specialist. Her expertise in AI in education is underscored by her role as an AI trainer and former Education Policy Fellow (EPFP™) at Columbia University's Teachers College. As a columnist for Stankevicius, she explores Nicomachean Ethics at the intersection of AI and education. She has contributed to initiatives like Computers for Schools Burundi, served as a resource specialist for Amity University in Uttar Pradesh, India, and participated in TESOL "Train the Trainer" programs in Yemen and Morocco. Her research interests include simulations and metaverse for educators-in-training, AI applications in education and language acquisition and teaching, and distributed ledger technologies, with a focus on her 'Education for 2060' theme. In conclusion, my commitment extends beyond transactional interactions, focusing instead on utilizing my skills and privileges to make a positive, enduring impact on the world.

Education for 2060 and Touro University TESOL Candidate Rachel Melamed’s Padlet

Touro University TESOL Department’s Curriculum Development and Classroom Management in the Technology Era philsophy:

Education for 2060 will require TESOL educators who can design and create meaningful artifacts using technology, not simply describe or evaluate its use. In my view, the central shift is from consumption to production: educators must be able to develop digital materials, curate multimodal resources, and construct learning environments that actively engage multilingual learners. This emphasis on creation reflects a broader redefinition of teaching as a design-oriented practice grounded in both pedagogy and technological fluency.

Within this framework, the intersection of curriculum development, classroom management, and digital innovation reshapes how learning experiences are constructed for English language learners (ELLs). Technology supports varied ways of learning, fosters critical thinking, and increases efficiency in task completion. It also provides teachers with opportunities to design instructional materials, adapt content for diverse learners, and facilitate more responsive forms of classroom interaction.

As the field of TESOL continues to evolve, it is no longer sufficient for teacher candidates to be aware of digital tools or to discuss their potential. They need to demonstrate the ability to create instructional artifacts that connect with students, expand access to content, and enhance teaching quality. In this sense, technology becomes a medium for design. It enables the development of interactive materials, multiple forms of representation, communication with diverse stakeholders, and platforms for inquiry. This assignment, therefore, positions candidates as creators, asking them to design artifacts that respond to the linguistic, academic, and sociocultural needs of ELLs and their families.

The assignment moves beyond surface-level familiarity by requiring candidates to evaluate how their chosen tools support TESOL instructional strategies such as scaffolding, differentiation, and multimodal learning. Teachers must determine how the artifacts they create align with specific pedagogical goals, which requires deliberate integration rather than simple adoption. Technology can extend instructional strategies by supporting interaction and collaboration while also generating data that informs teaching decisions.

By asking candidates to design, justify, and reflect on their artifacts in relation to curriculum standards, community engagement, and instructional effectiveness, the assignment develops the kind of professional reasoning needed for work with linguistically diverse populations. In my view, this focus on creation is essential for preparing educators for education for 2060. Future classrooms will require teachers who can build, adapt, and critically evaluate digital learning environments, not merely participate in them. This assignment, therefore, represents a step toward my topic “Education for 2060,” by positioning TESOL educators as intentional designers of technology-mediated learning.

Rachel Melamed is a high school teacher in Brooklyn working with multilingual learners. She received her bachelor’s degree from SUNY Cortland and is currently pursuing her TESOL master’s degree at Touro University, where she focuses on helping students understand content while building their academic language. She aims to create a classroom where students feel confident participating and supported in their learning.

The TESOL program at Touro University has changed the way I plan for my students, making me more intentional about breaking down content and providing support to improve language and comprehension.

Rachel Melamed, Touro University TESOL Candidate

Link:

A Language Teacher’s Action Guide for Affix Word Trees: A SoR Morphological Pedagogy Infographic

By Dr. Jasmin (Bey) Cowin

The five-stage Affix Word Tree Action Guide is not a standalone vocabulary exercise. It is, in fact, deeply grounded in the evidentiary base that constitutes the Science of Reading (SoR), a body of converging research drawn from cognitive science, linguistics, and educational psychology that identifies the foundational competencies required for skilled reading. Situating this instructional framework within SoR principles strengthens its theoretical legitimacy for ESOL, ENL, EFL and TESOL teacher candidates working across multilingual, K-12, and adult literacy contexts.

Morphological Awareness Within the Science of Reading

The Science of Reading is frequently organized around two overarching constructs: word recognition and language comprehension (Scarborough, 2001). Scarborough’s (2001) multistrand model of reading development identifies morphological knowledge as a contributing thread within the language comprehension strand, alongside background knowledge, vocabulary, and syntactic awareness. The Affix Word Tree Action Guide directly addresses this strand by systematically building learners’ capacity to recognize how morphological structure signals both meaning and grammatical function.

The infographic presented constitutes a structured pedagogical framework designed to scaffold morphological awareness instruction within second language acquisition (SLA) contexts. Drawing on foundational research in vocabulary development, particularly Nation’s (2001) lexical approach and Bauer and Nation’s (1993) taxonomy of English word families, this five-stage action guide operationalizes affix word tree methodology as a systematic instructional sequence rather than an incidental classroom activity.

Morphological awareness, defined as the explicit knowledge of how meaningful units (morphemes) combine to form words, has been consistently identified in the literature as a robust predictor of reading comprehension and productive vocabulary growth among English language learners (Kieffer & Lesaux, 2008; Tyler & Nagy, 1989). Yet despite this evidence base, morphology instruction remains underrepresented in many TESOL classrooms, often displaced by communicative fluency activities or decontextualized vocabulary lists. This action guide directly addresses that pedagogical gap.

Each stage in the framework reflects a deliberate progression from receptive recognition to productive application, mirroring the input-to-output continuum foundational to Swain’s (1985) Output Hypothesis. Stage 1 activates prior lexical schemata; Stages 2 and 3 engage learners in collaborative analysis and categorization; Stages 4 and 5 shift agency to the learner, requiring both generative tree construction and grammatical integration of derived forms.

As ESOL/ENL/EFL educators, you might engage with this infographic in two ways. First, analyze each stage as a principled instructional decision, noting how teacher actions and student tasks are deliberately aligned. Second, you are invited to consider how this framework might be adapted across proficiency levels, L1 backgrounds, and disciplinary content areas, recognizing that morphologically rich instruction is not a one-size-fits-all intervention but a flexible, evidence-informed repertoire. The integration of part-of-speech labeling, semantic analysis, and L1 equivalence in Stage 3 reflects an additive, translanguaging-informed stance toward linguistic diversity in the multilingual classroom.

This framework is offered not as a rigid script but as a visualization or thinking tool, one that makes the invisible architecture of English word formation visible, learnable, and teachable.

References

Bauer, L., & Nation, I. S. P. (1993). Word families. International Journal of Lexicography, 6(4), 253–279. https://doi.org/10.1093/ijl/6.4.253

Kieffer, M. J., & Lesaux, N. K. (2008). The role of derivational morphology in the reading comprehension of Spanish-speaking English language learners. Reading and Writing, 21(8), 783–804. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9092-8

Nation, I. S. P. (2001). Learning vocabulary in another language. Cambridge University Press.

Scarborough, H. S. (2001). Connecting early language and literacy to later reading (dis)abilities: Evidence, theory, and practice. In S. B. Neuman & D. K. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 97–110). Guilford Press.

Swain, M. (1985). Communicative competence: Some roles of comprehensible input and comprehensible output in its development. In S. M. Gass & C. G. Madden (Eds.), Input in second language acquisition (pp. 235–253). Newbury House. https://www.scirp.org/reference/referencespapers?referenceid=1501919

Tyler, A., & Nagy, W. (1989). The acquisition of English derivational morphology. Journal of Memory and Language, 28(6), 649–667. https://doi.org/10.1016/0749-596X(89)90002-8

SoR: Teacher and Student Reading Skills Table


Supporting Instructional Alignment in Science of Reading Implementation

The Teacher and Student Reading Skills Table is intended to support educators in aligning instructional practices with evidence-based literacy research. Rather than operating as a scope-and-sequence, the table aims to clarify instructional roles, student skill development, grade band emphasis, tiered supports, and multilingual learner considerations. When used deliberately, it may help reduce ambiguity in Science of Reading implementation.

Foundational Skills: Phonological and Phonemic Awareness

The chart places phonological and phonemic awareness within oral language instruction, with emphasis in Pre-K through Grade 1. Teachers are expected to model and teach sound awareness and manipulation, while students work to hear, segment, blend, and manipulate sounds in spoken language.

An important implication of this framing is that phonemic awareness instruction does not rely on English vocabulary knowledge. For multilingual learners, sound awareness and lexical knowledge represent related but distinct competencies. Instruction that separates these skills may support more accurate interpretation of student performance and instructional need.

Across tiers, the chart suggests that increased intensity should involve additional practice and diagnostic attention rather than a shift to alternative activities.

Phonics and Orthographic Mapping

The chart situates phonics and orthographic mapping primarily in Kindergarten through Grade 2. Teachers provide systematic instruction in sound–spelling correspondences and guide repeated connections between print, pronunciation, and meaning. Students apply letter–sound knowledge to decode and gradually store words in memory.

This progression reflects the view that orthographic mapping develops through repeated, accurate decoding rather than exposure alone. The tiered structure emphasizes that students who experience difficulty may benefit from greater explicitness and structured practice rather than compensatory strategies.

For multilingual learners, contrastive analysis of English spelling patterns and home language orthographies is presented as an important instructional support when integrated within explicit phonics instruction.

Decoding and Word Recognition

In Grades 1 through 3, the table highlights instruction focused on accurate decoding strategies. Teachers guide students to attend to print, while students practice decoding unfamiliar words and building automatic word recognition.

The multilingual learner guidance encourages prioritizing print-based information and limiting reliance on pictures or context cues. This emphasis aims to support efficient word recognition development and to reduce instructional practices that may interfere with decoding growth.

Tiered supports in this domain are intended to reflect differences in intensity and instructional focus, informed by observed error patterns and student response to instruction.

Reading Fluency

Fluency instruction is emphasized in Grades 2 through 4 and is described as involving teacher modeling and guided oral reading with feedback. Students work toward reading connected text with increasing accuracy, rate, and phrasing.

The table notes that accent and developing prosody are not necessarily indicators of decoding difficulty. This consideration may help educators interpret fluency data more carefully for multilingual learners and distinguish between linguistic variation and skill-based needs.

Across tiers, fluency instruction becomes more targeted and closely monitored, with attention to maintaining a connection to underlying decoding accuracy.

Vocabulary and Language Comprehension

Vocabulary and language comprehension are presented as ongoing instructional priorities from Kindergarten through Grade 12. Teachers explicitly address word meanings, morphology, syntax, and sentence-level cohesion, while students work to understand and use language across contexts.

The chart’s separation of vocabulary, language comprehension, and reading comprehension reflects the view that these domains develop through related but distinct instructional pathways. For multilingual learners, intentional oral vocabulary development, explicit syntax instruction, and careful use of cognates may support language comprehension growth.

Tiered instruction in these areas often emphasizes depth of understanding and structured language practice rather than reduced linguistic demand.

Reading Comprehension and Metacognitive Monitoring

Reading comprehension instruction begins in early elementary grades and extends through secondary levels. Teachers model comprehension strategies and guide discussion grounded in text, while students practice constructing meaning, making inferences, and integrating ideas.

Metacognitive monitoring, introduced in Grade 2 and beyond, involves teacher modeling of think-alouds and instruction in comprehension repair strategies. Students develop the ability to notice breakdowns in understanding and apply appropriate fix-up strategies.

The table acknowledges that cultural norms may influence how students express confusion, suggesting that educators consider multiple indicators of comprehension.

Multi-Tiered Systems of Support and Instructional Coherence

The tiered structure outlined in the chart is intended to support instructional coherence across Tier I, Tier II, and Tier III. Core instruction provides the foundation, while targeted and intensive supports increase explicitness, practice, and responsiveness.

This framing positions MTSS as a system for adjusting instruction based on student need rather than as a static placement model.

Conclusion

I believe the value of the Teacher and Student Reading Skills Reference Table lies in its attempt to make instructional expectations more explicit across reading domains, grade bands, and tiers of support. When used reflectively, it may support instructional planning, collaborative decision-making, and more consistent implementation of Science of Reading principles across diverse classroom contexts.

Infographic by Dr. Jasmin (Bey) Cowin: Reading Error Root Cause Reference Sheet – From Student Error to Instructional Action

This infographic is designed for educators working with Emergent Writers and Newcomers to Literacy (EWNL), English as a Foreign Language (EFL), and TESOL learners across elementary, secondary, and adult contexts who are acquiring literacy in alphabetic writing systems. Its purpose is to support instructional decision-making grounded in the Science of Reading by linking observable reading errors to the specific cognitive and linguistic processes that underlie word recognition.

The organizing principle of the infographic, the instructional response must match the processing breakdown, not the surface error, reflects a central finding of reading science: word reading difficulties arise from identifiable breakdowns in component processes rather than from general language proficiency, motivation, or exposure to text. Decades of research demonstrate that effective reading instruction requires diagnosing which processing system has failed and responding at that level with targeted instruction (Gough & Tunmer, 1986; Moats, 2020).

The framework is structured around four empirically supported domains of word recognition: phonemic awareness, phonics knowledge, decoding behavior, and automaticity. These domains align with models of skilled reading that distinguish between language comprehension and word recognition, most notably the Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986), and with research on orthographic mapping as the mechanism that enables accurate and fluent word reading (Ehri, 2014; Share, 1995).

Each panel in the infographic identifies a specific processing breakdown and pairs it with an instructional response that directly supports orthographic mapping. For example, phonemic gaps require oral phoneme manipulation without print, while phonics gaps require explicit instruction in sound–symbol correspondences. Weak decoding habits reflect reliance on context or partial visual cues, which research has shown does not support long-term word learning (Share, 1995). Lack of automaticity reflects constrained working memory during reading and calls for accurate repeated practice rather than new phonics instruction (LaBerge & Samuels, 1974).

  1. Working Memory Capacity: Readers have limited working memory. Non-automatic word recognition quickly exhausts this capacity, hindering comprehension.
  2. Role of Practice: The goal of practice is to make decoding and word recognition so fast and accurate that it becomes automatic.
  3. Focus on Fluency: Instead of introducing new rules, practice should focus on increasing the speed and ease with which known skills are applied.

For multilingual learners, including EFL and TESOL students of all ages, this distinction is essential. Research indicates that decoding difficulties in second-language readers often mirror those of monolingual learners and should be addressed through the same evidence-based instructional approaches, while keeping language comprehension supports separate (August & Shanahan, 2006; Lesaux et al., 2007).

The instructional decision check reinforces a diagnostic stance toward reading errors, treating them as data that inform instruction. This approach aligns with Science of Reading principles that emphasize precision, systematic instruction, and alignment between assessment and response.

References

Touro University TESOL Candidate Jennifer Taranto’s Fieldwork for EDDN 637 – Second Language Learners and the Content Areas

MS in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages

Course Description
Students will become acquainted with and practice effective approaches, methods, and strategies for teaching and evaluating English language learners in the content areas (ELA, Social Studies, Math and Science). Throughout the course, students will explore the impact of culture and language upon classroom learning. Special challenges in teaching and assessment in each content area will be discussed. Examination and analysis of curriculum materials and instructional strategies for creative teaching and learning in grades Pe-K-12. Includes content-specific lesson planning that addresses the New York State Student Content Learning Standards with emphasis
on English Language Arts, English as a Second Language, and content area instruction. Course content includes demonstrations, simulated activities, and field observations in Pre-K-12 classrooms. The course also examines how the teaching of English to non- native speakers can be integrated with the teaching of cognitive skills in all content areas. Students will be offered a variety of methods and materials to integrate ESL standards throughout all content areas for classroom use. Includes 15 hours of fieldwork. Includes 15 hours of fieldwork. 3 credits

Jennifer Taranto: I’m graduating with my TESOL certification this June, and I can’t wait to bring everything I’ve learned into the classroom. After 17 years as a paraprofessional and now three years as a special education teacher, I’ve learned that every student shines when given the right scaffolds and support. Teaching in a 12:1 classroom keeps me on my toes, challenges me to be creative, and reminds me why I love this work every single day.

“During my 15 hours of ENL field observations, I learned that effective teaching goes beyond delivering content; it’s about creating a learning environment where all students can participate and feel confident. Seeing how intentional scaffolding, clear instruction, and ongoing support help English learners access content showed me the real impact thoughtful teaching can have on student engagement and success.” Jennifer Taranto, Touro University TESOL Candidate

Ms. Taranto wrote in her fieldwork paper:

“Throughout these lessons, teachers consistently integrated explicit language objectives, modeled think-alouds, provided sentence frames and word banks, and designed opportunities for oral rehearsal prior to writing, moves that reflect core sheltered instruction practices for making content comprehensible while advancing language development (Echevarria, Vogt, & Short, 2017; Kareva & Echevarria, 2013). The instructional materials throughout the lesson followed a purposeful multimodal approach. The segregation lesson utilized historical photographs, while picture cards and sentence strips helped students learn sentence structure and the past tense, and emojis aided them in understanding the meanings of adjectives and their effects.” Jennifer Taranto, Touro University TESOL Candidate

In my opinion, this passage clearly crystallizes her fieldwork insights for several reasons.

First, it demonstrates analytic synthesis rather than description. Jennifer moves beyond listing observed practices and explicitly names how those practices function within a sheltered instruction framework. The linkage between observed classroom moves and theoretical constructs such as comprehensible input, multimodality, and oral rehearsal signals disciplinary competence and analytic maturity.

Second, this section demonstrates a tight alignment between the data and the framework. She does not merely cite the SIOP Model, but illustrates its components through concrete instructional examples, such as think-alouds and sentence frames. This alignment indicates that she synthesized SIOP as an enacted pedagogy rather than an abstract checklist.

Third, the passage captures fieldwork-specific insight that could only emerge from sustained observation. The reference to emojis, historical photographs, and sentence strips reflects attention to how teachers translate abstract language demands into tangible semiotic supports. This is a hallmark of strong qualitative fieldwork analysis, as it foregrounds instructional decision-making in context.

637 Field Work Paper Fall fieldwork (1)Download

Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice publishes Transdisciplinary Dialogues on AI in Education: Earth, Air, Water, Fire as Metaphors for Change

I am delighted to announce that our article was published!

Dacey, C. M., Cowin, J., & de los Reyes, J. (2026). Transdisciplinary dialogues on AI in education. Journal of Invitational Theory and Practice, 31, 60–80. https://doi.org/10.26522/jitp.v31i.5420

Abstract: The authors integrate the classical elements – earth, air, water, and fire – within post-human perspectives to explore the multifaceted integration of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in educational contexts. A transdisciplinary approach invited a fertile dialogue among three academic experts from distinct fields of study, who then examined the transformative impact of AI in education: transcending traditional anthropocentric perspectives. In the ‘Earth’ metaphor, the narrative likens AI’s role to Earth’s stabilizing properties. It critically analyzes AI simulations in various disciplines, emphasizing AI’s support in fundamental learning and cognitive development, yet maintaining skepticism about its effects on embodied cognition and experiential learning. Addressing ‘Water’, the authors underscore the need for fluid, adaptable educational governance in response to AI integration. This element resonates with post-human ideas of fluidity and hybridity, urging educational systems to be responsive while expressing concerns about rapid technological changes and their wider implications, calling for thoughtful policy revisions. The focus in ‘Fire’ shifts to AI’s transformative effects on educational governance, intertwining ethical and data privacy issues. The authors critique the potential centralization of power of educational technology companies and the importance of preventing educational inequities and biases. Transitioning to ‘Air’, the focus is upon AI’s exponential impact on pedagogy, just as air facilitates communication. The authors examine AI’s potential for personalizing learning and enhancing interactive dynamics. Examining this element also highlights the importance of algorithmic transparency and the risks of diminishing human roles in education. Finally, the authors examine and interpret the United Nations’ Agenda 2030through a post-human perspective, advocating for an educational governance model and framework that acknowledges the interplay between human, non-human, and technological entities, thereby emphasizing the need for transdisciplinary perspectives on AI in education to capture the Zeitgeist of the Fourth Industrial Revolution.

Transdisciplinary Dialogues on AI in EducationDownload

Dr. Cowin publishes: “Narwhals, unicorns, and Big Tech’s messiah complex: A transdisciplinary allegory for the age of AI,” in The Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics

“Silicon Valley’s faith in technology as the savior of humanity
echoes ancient myths of divine intervention.” Lanier (2013)

This essay investigates the Messiah Savior Complex in Big Tech, where artificial intelligence is presented as a redemptive force capable of solving humanity’s most urgent challenges. Using the historical analogy of the narwhal tusk trade, in which tusks were sold as unicorn horns to European elites, the analysis illustrates how myth-based narratives continue to influence technological realities. In contemporary discourse, these narratives take the form of hyperstitions, which are beliefs that become real through repetition, institutional reinforcement, and collective investment. Such dynamics obscure empirical scrutiny and displace critical engagement with the socio-technical realities of AI development. The essay argues that magical thinking and industry promotion often sustain these belief structures to deflect regulatory oversight and maintain public enthusiasm. Rather than rejecting technological progress, the paper calls for a transdisciplinary framework that treats AI as embedded in systems requiring accountability, transparency, and contextual awareness.

The unicorn horn deception was not merely a case of medieval gullibility but a sophisticated system that leveraged cultural symbols and created powerful incentives to maintain the existing illusion. Similarly, today’s AI narratives function as powerful mythologies that shape investment, policy, and public understanding. Cowin, J. (2025). Narwhals, unicorns, and Big Tech’s messiah complex: A transdisciplinary allegory for the age of AI. The Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and Informatics, 23(7), 146–151. https://www.iiisci.org/journal/sci/Contents.asp?Previous=#/

Narwhals, unicorns, and Big Tech’s messiah complex_ A transdisciplinary allegory for the age of AI_The Journal of Systemics, Cybernetics and InformaticsDownload

Touro University TESOL Candidate Carly Croteau’s Student Work Demonstrating Disciplined Copilot Use

EDPN 673 – Methods and Materials for Teaching English as a Second Language

This course provides a historical overview of second language acquisition theories and teaching methods. Students learn how to apply current approaches, methods and techniques, with attention to the effective use of materials, in teaching English as a second language. Students will engage in the planning and implementation of standards-based ESL instruction which includes differentiated learning experiences geared to students’ needs. Emphasis is placed on creating culturally responsive learning environments. Includes 15 hours of field work.

Instructional Materials Critique and Redesign

This assignment centers on material analysis as a core professional skill. Candidates critically examine two instructional materials at different grade levels to investigate how linguistic demands, discourse expectations, and access points for multilingual learners vary across instructional contexts. This comparative approach is designed to move candidates away from generic notions of “ELL strategies” and toward a disciplined analysis of language use, text complexity, and opportunities for meaning-making. In my view, this kind of analytic work is foundational to effective TESOL practice and is often underemphasized in methods coursework.

Within the context of the AI grant, Copilot is used in a deliberately structured way. It functions as a generative drafting tool that supports instructional redesign, not as an instructional authority. Candidates identify a specific instructional limitation in a selected material, use Copilot to generate a redesign artifact, and then evaluate and revise that output using WIDA English Language Development Standards, New York State Next Generation Learning Standards, and established TESOL frameworks. The requirement to critique and modify AI generated content foregrounds professional judgment and exposes the limitations of automated outputs in addressing linguistic precision and cultural responsiveness.

The infographic component extends this work by requiring candidates to synthesize analytic findings into a visual support that could plausibly mediate content access for multilingual learners. This element emphasizes multimodality as an instructional practice rather than a design exercise. Taken together, the assignment models an approach to AI use that is critical, standards aligned, and grounded in the everyday instructional decisions TESOL educators must make.

Carly Croteau is in her second-to-last semester at Touro University. She serves in her Fourth Year of Teaching as a fourth-grade general education teacher within an ENL classroom. Carly shared a quote to describe her Touro Journey: “I’ve learned that people will forget what you said, people will forget what you did, but people will never forget how you made them feel.” by Maya Angelou

Carly Croteau’s exemplary submission demonstrates a precise, standards-aligned critique of both materials and a redesigned artifact that clearly addresses an identified linguistic barrier for multilingual learners. Her use of Copilot is transparent and disciplined, with revisions that reflect strong TESOL knowledge and well-justified instructional decision-making.

EDPN 673 Instructional Material Critique (1).docxDownload

Xavier Campoverde’s work with CoPilot and Materials Critique & Redesign for Touro University’s TESOL Course EDPN 673

The Touro University Copilot Grant supports my work as a faculty member in explicitly teaching teacher candidates how to use Copilot as an instructional design tool within a structured, standards-aligned pedagogical framework. In this course, Copilot is not introduced as an optional productivity aid. It is taught as a professional instructional resource whose use must be intentional, transparent, and grounded in TESOL theory, state standards, and multilingual learner pedagogy.

The instructional focus of this grant-funded work is on teaching candidates how to work with Copilot, rather than merely allowing its use. Candidates are guided through a faculty-modeled process that emphasizes instructional problem identification, constrained prompting, critical evaluation of AI-generated outputs, and revision based on professional judgment.

Instructional context and assignment purpose

The Copilot integration is based on a major assessment titled “Instructional Material Critique and Redesign with Infographic.” The assignment is designed to teach candidates how to critically analyze instructional materials and redesign them to improve accessibility and rigor for multilingual learners.

Materials may include complete texts or individual chapters from instructional resources commonly used in schools. The assignment explicitly teaches candidates how to engage in mastery-level material critique and redesign using established TESOL and multilingual education frameworks.

Explicit teaching of Copilot as an instructional design tool

Within this assignment, I explicitly teach candidates how Copilot can be used as a co-creative instructional design partner under faculty supervision and pedagogical constraints. Copilot is introduced through direct instruction and modeling, not discovery-based experimentation.

  • Generates draft instructional materials, not finished products
  • Requires human evaluation using research-based criteria
  • Must be revised to ensure linguistic accuracy, cultural responsiveness, and standards alignment

This explicit framing positions Copilot as part of the instructional design process, not as an authority or substitute for professional educators’ expertise.

Xavier Campoverde is a bilingual social studies teacher at the high school he attended growing up. He is passionate about ensuring that every student has the ability to learn based on their individual needs, building on what they already know, and establishing a safe learning environment for all. He is also a proud husband and father to two wonderful children.

I learned that being a TESOL educator means being an advocate, a designer, and a listener, using data, culture, and technology to ensure every multilingual learner can thrive. Xavier Campoverde, Touro University TESOL Candidate.

Materials Critique Redesign XavierDownload

Touro TESOL Candidate Madison Derwin’s Field Observations and Reflections

Fieldwork reflection is a critical component of TESOL candidate growth because it functions as the primary mechanism through which theoretical knowledge is transformed into professional judgment. In EDDN 635, curriculum development and classroom management are not treated as abstract constructs but as situated practices shaped by technology, policy, and the linguistic realities of multilingual learners. Reflective fieldwork allows candidates to systematically examine how instructional decisions, technological tools, and classroom management strategies interact to support or constrain language development in real educational settings.

From a pedagogical standpoint, structured reflection promotes metacognition, professional noticing, and evidence based reasoning. By observing classrooms, libraries, and technology infrastructures, and by engaging with ICT specialists and educators, candidates learn to analyze curriculum design choices in relation to student needs, institutional constraints, and state level policies. Reflection deepens this analysis by requiring candidates to connect observations to course readings, TESOL principles, and research on technology mediated instruction. In my opinion, this deliberate linking of theory, observation, and analysis is what moves candidates beyond description toward informed instructional decision making.

Ultimately, reflective fieldwork supports the development of adaptive, reflective practitioners who can design technology integrated curricula that are linguistically responsive, pedagogically sound, and contextually appropriate. For TESOL candidates, this process strengthens professional identity, sharpens analytical skills, and lays the foundation for sustained growth in an increasingly complex and technology driven educational landscape.

Madison Derwin holds a Bachelor’s Degree in Inclusive Childhood Education from SUNY Cortland. She is currently pursuing a Master’s Degree in TESOL and working as a 4th-grade Teacher’s Assistant at an elementary school on Long Island. Her goal as an educator is to create an inclusive, supportive learning environment that empowers every student to reach their full potential and thrive both academically and socially. She shared a favorite quote: “I’m not telling you it’s going to be easy- I’m telling you it’s going to be worth it.”- Art Williams

EDDN 635 Reflection Paper Madison Fall 25Download

Madison Derwin 673 fall 25 MultimediaDownload