Tag: learning

Touro University TESOL Candidate Maria Quiroz SIOP’s Practice and Application Discussion Board

EDDN 637 Second Language Learners and the Content Areas

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 on classroom learning. Special challenges in teaching and assessment in each content area will also be discussed. Includes 15 hours of field work.

Maria Quiroz is a Spanish teacher at John Adams High School in New York City. She is currently pursuing a Master’s degree in TESOL at Touro University, where she focuses on supporting multilingual learners through effective instructional strategies. Her work emphasizes creating engaging, inclusive, and language-rich classroom environments.

“My journey at Touro has helped me connect theory to real classroom practice, allowing me to better support my multilingual learners. I have grown as an educator by learning how to design lessons that build both content knowledge and language skills. This program has strengthened my confidence and commitment to teaching diverse students.” Maria Quiroz, Touro University TESOL Candidate

Exemplary Discussion Board 7 Practice and Application submission for EDDN 637 Second Language Learners and the Content Areas

Prof. Jasmin Cowin: This Discussion Board submission is exemplary because it demonstrates a clear and applied understanding of the SIOP model through the integration of hands-on practice, structured application tasks, and attention to multiple language domains. It is further strengthened by the effective use of direct textual evidence to support instructional decisions and by the analytical treatment of teaching scenarios, which moves beyond description to evaluation. The discussion of writing samples is particularly well developed, as it connects proficiency levels to observable learner performance, reflecting a grounded understanding of second-language development.

  1. Textbook Chapter 7 Practice and Application (p. 182-203): What activities are you planning to provide for your students in your SIOP lesson to apply content and language knowledge? Support your statement by quoting directly from the text with the page number.

In my SIOP lesson, I plan to use hands-on practice and meaningful application tasks so students can build content understanding while also using academic language. First, I will include manipulatives or visual models that students can touch, move, and use to demonstrate new concepts. The chapter explains that “students have a greater chance of mastering content concepts and skills when they are given multiple opportunities to practice in relevant, meaningful ways” (p. 185).

Next, I will design an application task that asks students to use the new concept in a new way, such as explaining a process to a partner using sentence frames, creating a short written explanation, or acting out a concept and describing it orally. This matches the idea that for students learning a new language, application matters because “discussing and ‘doing’ make the abstract concepts more concrete” (p. 187).

I will also plan for students to use more than one language domain in the same lesson, so they practice speaking, listening, reading, and writing connected to the same objective. The chapter states that for SIOP instruction, “practice and application tasks should also aim for practice of all four language skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking” (p. 183).

2. Teaching scenarios, starting on p. 193 – discuss your takeaways from the teaching scenarios and quote directly from the text with the page number.

My key takeaway from the teaching scenarios is that practice and application must be active and structured, so students do not stay passive. In Mrs. Bertoni’s lesson, students listened, repeated, copied, and then were expected to complete homework independently, but they did not get guided opportunities to practice and apply the concepts in class. The discussion makes this point clearly: “Listening to a teacher read is not a practice activity” (p. 198).

In contrast, Mr. Sherbiny’s lesson shows what strong SIOP Practice and Application looks like. Students used hands-on materials, practiced the language frames aloud, read a text, wrote sentences, and applied concepts through examples and demonstrations. The scenario analysis highlights that “students used manipulatives in small groups to demonstrate revolution and rotation and practiced language frames to explain the concepts” (p. 198).

Mrs. Aliheri’s lesson reminded me that interactive activities still need careful scaffolding. Even though she used a video and tried word cards, the task did not set students up for success because there were missing supports and unclear steps. The text explains that “her planning was poor, as was the execution of the task” (p. 198). Overall, these scenarios reinforced that SIOP practice must be hands-on and guided, and application must require students to use both content knowledge and language in a supportive structure.

3. Choose one grade-level writing sample to build your understanding of the different writing competencies and levels at your teaching level.  Choose 3 writing samples of your grade level and discuss how they are similar/not similar to what you see your ELL/ML students produce in your writing assessments. Select a writing sample below. INCLUDE A SCREENSHOT of the writing sample because neither your peers nor I will be able to guess what you are analyzing!

https://www.learnalberta.ca/content/eslapb/writing_samples.htmlLinks to an external site. 

For this part, I selected three Grades 7–9 writing samples at Level 1, Level 3, and Level 5 from the LearnAlberta Writing Assessment Exemplars to understand differences in writing competencies across proficiency levels.

Level 1 shows very basic writing control. The writing is short, repetitive, and relies on simple sentence patterns. Ideas are listed more than developed, and there are frequent grammar errors that affect clarity. This looks similar to what I see when my beginner language learners write, even in my Spanish classroom. At early stages, students often depend on repeated sentence starters and basic vocabulary because they are still building control of word order and sentence structure.

Level 3 shows growth in development and organization. The student writes a longer response, attempts to explain reasons, and includes more detail. Sentences are longer and more complete, and the ideas connect more logically, even if there are still noticeable language errors. This is similar to what I see when students move from novice to more intermediate performance in a second language. They take more risks with language and expand their ideas, but they still need support with accuracy and cohesion.

Level 5 shows stronger control of extended writing. The response is longer, more organized, and includes explanations and examples. Vocabulary is more varied, and sentences show more complexity, even though some grammar issues remain. This resembles what I see in my more advanced language learners, who can sustain an argument or explanation and elaborate their ideas with more independence.

References

Echevarría, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. J. (2017). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model(5th ed.). Pearson.

Alberta Education. (n.d.). Writing assessment exemplars: Grades 7–9. LearnAlberta. https://www.learnalberta.ca/content/eslapb/writing_samples.html

Touro University TESOL Candidate Kamryn Sherman’s Differentiated Instructional Activity Assignment with Focus on Assessment

The MS in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL) Program helps NYS-certified PreK-12 teachers more effectively teach and communicate with a diverse student population

If you have questions about our admissions requirements, certification guidelines, or transfer credits, feel free to contact us.

The EDDN 637 Differentiated Assessment

The EDDN 637 Differentiated Assessment assignment connects the principles of differentiation to the practical work of classroom teaching by focusing on lesson planning, authentic student products, reflection, and multimodal explanation.

It begins with an existing lesson plan and asks for a modified version that incorporates differentiated assessment. This structure reflects classroom reality: teachers often adapt existing lessons to better respond to students’ readiness, interests, and learning profiles. Using the same lesson plan template for both the original and revised versions makes the instructional changes visible and easy to compare.

A central feature of the assignment is the use of anonymized student products. These products provide concrete evidence of how differentiation functions in practice. Rather than discussing differentiation only in theory, the assignment requires analyzing real student work and demonstrates how assessment can be adjusted while maintaining meaningful learning goals.

The reflection component supports professional growth by requiring an explanation of how differentiated assessment applies to English language learners and multilingual learners. The use of Grammarly is required as part of the writing and revision process. The screenshot requirement also supports transparency in completing the reflection.

The video component adds another practical dimension. By presenting one aspect of differentiated assessment through Padlet, the assignment connects written analysis to oral explanation. This mirrors professional teaching contexts, where instructional decisions must often be explained clearly to colleagues, supervisors, or families.

The assignment is AI-resistant because it depends on authentic, context-specific evidence. A generic response cannot replace an actual lesson plan, anonymized student work, a documented revision process, and a personalized explanation of classroom practice. AI may support limited tasks, such as helping create a graphic organizer when properly disclosed, but it cannot substitute for the required connection among teaching context, student products, reflection, and professional judgment.

Overall, the assignment links differentiation theory to classroom-based assessment practice. It emphasizes that differentiated assessment is not only a planning concept, but a documented instructional process grounded in the needs and products of multilingual learners.

Kamryn Sherman is currently teaching at Buchanan-Verplanck Elementary School as a 1st-grade leave replacement in an ENL co-taught classroom. She earned her degree in Childhood Education (1-6) from SUNY Oswego and is currently pursuing her master’s in TESOL at Touro University. Her work focuses on creating inclusive, language-rich classrooms that help all students build confidence and feel valued in their learning.

“My time at Touro University has pushed me to think more deeply about my teaching and has strengthened my ability to support multilingual learners in meaningful ways.” Kamryn Sherman, Touro University TESOL Candidate

Differentiated Assessment Kamryn ShermanDownload

Padlet Link:

Differentiated Assessment in action

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:

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

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

Rachel Melamed master’s degree candidate in TESOL at Touro University: AI Literacy Through Method Embodiment


This assignment, Instructional Method Assignment – Teaching a Mini-Lesson to an ML Audience, required creating a simulated teaching video that demonstrates one specific language teaching method from our course readings. This is a pretend lesson where you act as the teacher presenting to an imaginary multilingual learner audience for 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.

The assignment was designed to deepen TESOL candidates’ methodological expertise while positioning them to engage with artificial intelligence in purposeful and pedagogically sound ways. It reflects Touro University’s broader initiative to strengthen AI literacy across its programs through a Touro Faculty AI Grant headed and supported by Shlomo Engelson Argamon, Associate Provost for Artificial Intelligence and Professor of Computer Science, and Jamie Sundvall, Ph.D, Psy.D, LP, LCSW, Assistant Provost of Artificial Intelligence. Within this institutional landscape, the assignment serves as a structured model for preparing educators to work in learning environments where AI is increasingly integrated into curriculum, assessment, and multilingual support.

My motto, Education for 2060, emphasizes the development of shared spaces of competencies influenced by AI and large language models. As schools and districts integrate AI into core instructional processes, teacher education programs must develop candidates who can navigate these systems with ethical judgment and instructional precision. This assignment, therefore, balances two essential design principles: strong safeguards against unverified AI substitution and intentional guidance for targeted AI use.

The AI-resistant component centers on a six to seven-minute simulated teaching video that requires candidates to embody a single method from the course readings. By performing the method in a real physical space with realia, gesture, classroom presence, and teacher talk, candidates demonstrate the translation of theory into practice. This performance reveals decision-making, sequencing, and pedagogical rationale that cannot be delegated to AI, ensuring that candidates are evaluated on their own instructional competence.

Targeted AI use is built into the assignment through Copilot-supported planning and reflection. Copilot is positioned as a thinking partner that helps candidates examine the structural logic of the method, refine the flow of the activity, and interrogate their own understanding. Proof of work in the form of screenshots and reflective commentary ensures transparency and allows candidates to analyze the accuracy, limitations, and pedagogical value of AI-generated suggestions. In this way, the assignment teaches AI literacy as a reflective and evaluative process rather than a generative shortcut.

The written analysis links the performance to course theories, identifies the method features demonstrated in the video, and articulates how Copilot contributed to planning choices. This component reinforces conceptual understanding while modeling a professional stance toward responsible AI use.

By combining embodied demonstration with documented AI-supported thinking, the assignment prepares candidates for a future in which educators and AI systems occupy interconnected roles. It brings the work full circle by returning to the idea of shared spaces of competencies. Candidates learn to inhabit these spaces with confidence, contributing their own pedagogical judgment while engaging with AI in ways that enhance, rather than replace, their professional expertise.

Rachel Melamed is a high school teacher in Brooklyn, New York. She earned her bachelor’s degree in Inclusive Education from SUNY Cortland and is a first-generation graduate student pursuing her master’s in TESOL at Touro University. Growing up in a Russian-speaking household helped her develop a passion for teaching multilingual learners and shaped her approach to connecting with them in the classroom.

Using Copilot helped me rework a lesson I had taught before and make it more accessible for English language learners. I learned how small adjustments and simplified, repetitive language can make a big difference when designing lessons.

Rachel Melamed master’s degree candidate in TESOL at Touro University
Rachel M_Instructional Teaching method25Download

Joyann Castilletti, Touro University TESOL Candidate, on her experience working with structured prompt engineering and AI

MS in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages
TESOL – New York is a state that speaks many languages. We need teachers who can find the common ground.

🏛️ As part of Touro University’s comprehensive initiative to introduce #AI #literacy to our students, I am engaged in a #Touro #University #grant focused on developing AI literacy in #TESOL candidates. My project-based approach empowers future educators to leverage AI as a strategic partner in curriculum design, bridging theoretical understanding with applied classroom practice.

Joyann Castilletti is a 7th–12th grade certified English teacher,  currently working as a permanent substitute teacher while pursuing her TESOL degree at Touro University. She is passionate about creating learning environments where every student feels seen, heard, and loved, and where each learner is supported in achieving success. She continues to inspire a love of learning in every English learner while equipping them with the skills to communicate confidently and effectively. 

Although my time at Touro has been brief, it has inspired me to reconnect with my cultural roots through my father and grandmother, celebrating the legacy that came before me. Through Touro’s TESOL graduate program, I’ve had the opportunity to engage with peers from diverse backgrounds, sharing experiences that have enriched me professionally and sparked conversations I might never have had otherwise. 

Joyann Castilletti, Touro University TESOL Candidate

Joyann Castilletti, Touro University TESOL Candidate, on her experience working with structured prompt engineering and AI:

Using this prompt showed me a few things about designing rubrics. For starters, specifics are key to a solid rubric. When I first started student teaching, every assignment I gave had some sort of rubric mainly to protect myself in case a student didn’t do too well. Since student teaching, I have still utilized rubrics but have worked towards making them more specific and rooted in whatever standard I was working on. The rubric that CoPilot and ChatGPT provided is a great jumping point if my students were doing this presentation. My biggest negative with this rubric is that since CoPilot is primarily analytic based, it does not allow for a holistic view of my students (especially since all of my key domains were also analytical). When I make my rubrics, I try to include some element that allows my students that may struggle with the assignment a chance to achieve highly in one category. Additionally, since this rubric was generated from a prompt it did not allow me to have student insight which I like to do (unless I took this rubric to the students and had a discussion about it with them for recommendations or suggested changes). I do like that CoPilot clearly establishes the format of “you do exactly this– you get this score”. When I make my rubrics, I tend to struggle with the verbiage to express exactly what I am looking for and to separate between each score point. With this said, by utilizing this format, I can create more efficient rubrics and change them as needed to make my accommodations.   

Joyann Castilletti 673 db 4 FinalDownload

Touro TESOL Candidate Maria Quiroz’ Curriculum Analysis for EDDN 635 Curriculum Development and Classroom Management in the Technology Era

EDDN 635 Curriculum Development and Classroom Management in the Technology Era

This comprehensive course builds upon the foundation of curriculum development and classroom management in the context of teaching English language learners. Expanding its horizons to embrace the digital age, the course adeptly weaves innovative technology integration into the domain of Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages (TESOL). Crafted to empower prospective TESOL/BLE educators, the course hones in on fostering competence in designing, implementing, assessing, and reflecting within diverse language learning environments, all while capitalizing on the potentials of cutting-edge technology. With a strong focus on practical application and discerning appraisal of technological tools, this course primes upcoming educators to excel amidst the ever-evolving educational landscape. Includes 10 hours of field work.

Maria Quiroz is a certified World Language teacher in Spanish for grades 7–12, who also holds a FLES extension for grades K–6. She is currently pursuing her Master’s degree in TESOL at Touro University. Her goal is to create inclusive, engaging learning environments that support diverse language learners across all age levels.


Maria Quiroz’ reflection on the assignment itself: This assignment was part of the Curriculum Analysis project in the Touro TESOL program. I analyzed the Getting to Know New York City unit for high school Emerging-level Multilingual Learners, using the EDDN 635 Alignment Reflection Tool. The work involved examining alignment with New York State Next Generation ELA Standards and WIDA ELD Standards, identifying supports and barriers for multilingual learners, and reflecting on ways to strengthen language and content integration. The process included multiple drafts and revisions, allowing me to develop a deeper synthesis of research-based ESOL strategies and culturally responsive curriculum design.

“Touro has inspired me to embrace innovation and equity in my teaching and given me the tools to support multilingual learners with confidence and purpose.”
Thank you again for this opportunity.

Maria Quiroz, Touro TESOL Candidate
Mira 635 FINALcurriculm map analysisDownload