teachers – Dr. J's Education Blog

Touro University TESOL Candidate Crystal Ching: From Reading and Discourse to Prompt Engineering – Constructing Culturally Responsive Rubrics

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.

Crystal Ching: I am a student at Touro University pursuing my childhood dream of becoming a teacher. Through my studies, the Science of Reading has shown me that intentional, explicit, and evidence-based strategies move students towards success. I strive to create an inclusive, welcoming, and supportive environment where all students will grow and thrive. Outside of work and school, I enjoy spending time outdoors with my friends and family, trying new food spots and playing sports!

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

This course provides an 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 ENL instruction which includes differentiated learning experiences geared to students’ needs. Emphasis is placed on creating culturally responsive learning environments. The course also analyzes the applicability of applied linguistic studies to such teaching and the appropriateness of various methods and techniques to different developmental and skill levels. Special attention is given to curriculum development, planning and executing instructional activities. Additional emphasis is given to the selection of materials and the design of evaluation instruments for measuring cognitive development if the core subject areas. Includes 15 hours of fieldwork.3 credit hours

Prompt Engineering with Co-Pilot for Teacher Candidates

I use pre-created prompts to help my candidates develop rubrics with AI because this approach combines instructional scaffolding with professional judgment. By designing the prompts in advance, I can guide candidates toward course objectives, sound assessment principles, and program expectations while reducing the likelihood that AI will generate vague, misaligned, or inappropriate criteria.

I also see this process as a way to make rubric construction more transparent. Teacher candidates can examine how learning objectives are translated into assessment criteria, performance levels, and descriptors. I do not expect my candidates to accept an AI-generated rubric as a finished product. Instead, I ask them to evaluate, revise, and justify the rubric. This process supports assessment literacy, critical AI literacy, and reflective teaching.

Crystal Ching’s Insights: From Reading and Discourse to Prompt Engineering – Constructing Culturally Responsive Rubrics

Culture is prevalent and relevant in all aspects of learning, especially across all subjects and content areas for students. When teachers fail to understand a student’s first linguistic and cultural proficiency, it can be damaging their learning process. The role of linguistic and cultural proficiency in ESL/EFL reading and writing is to gauge what they know, understand patterns and how to proceed with support and instruction. As teachers, we can not assume that all students will know the rules of school, what sound a letter makes, or how to read and write the “proper way.” That “proper way” is how the Western culture reads and writes, but other cultures read and write another way. As Celce-Murica et al. (2013) note, “On the whole, to become proficient and effective communicators, learners need to attain L2 sociocultural competence” (p. 395). For example, the Western culture reads and writes from left to right. However, in other cultures, they read from right to left. As teachers, we can not assume that a child is confused or does not understand how to read and write. Instead, we need to understand the why, and that is due to their own culture and backgrounds. In addition, our Western culture in schools have certain rules. For example, lining up and walking together as a class to their next class. In other countries, students head to their next classes independently. These differences are not because a child is not following or respecting the rules of the classroom, but rather because this was their cultural routine and custom. Knowing a student’s L1 literacy is essential because it gives us teachers an understanding of what a student knows, literacy patterns they use, and how we can use their L1 as a foundation for their learning. When recognizing and identifying certain patterns of an L1, we can see the function of how a certain group uses language (Celce-Murica et al., 2013). Teachers can plan their future instruction based on a student’s L1 literacy, linguistic and cultural proficiency. We can build off what they know through existing patterns, or explicitly teach, model and integrate supports for these new skills and concepts. Without understanding a student’s culture and language, it only opens the gap for assumptions, confusion and frustration.

Chapter 21 has explored the use of assessment for formative purposes as well as for summative ones. Review the use of assessments in your classroom setting. What purposes do they serve? How are learners involved in learning and assessment? What external factors (e.g., NYS guidelines or state-mandated assessments) impact your choices about assessment? Celce-Murcia, Marianne; Brinton, Donna M.; Snow, Marguerite Ann. Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language (p. 335). Heinle ELT. Kindle Edition.

In my classroom, students take assessments to see if they understood the topic or skill. I find that assessments are the most important part to a lesson because this proves how much students comprehended the lesson, and allows me to identify any shortcomings of my lesson. As Celce-Murica et al., (2013) states, “Effective teachers use classroom assessment for multiple purposes, such as determining their students’ learning needs, diagnosing specific learning challenges, monitoring the development of students’ skills and engaging students in their own learning processes” (p. 321). I implement formal, informal and summative assessments. Informal assessments help me monitor if students are understanding the topic in the moment. For example, I observe think-pair-shares, thumbs up or down and prompt comprehension questions to see if students need more support. When doing these informal assessments, it allows me to be flexible and adjust my instruction towards their learning needs. As for formative assessments, I use exit tickets/quick checks and quizzes. Exit tickets and quick checks are after my lessons, and only about one to two questions. These questions show what the students understood about the lesson, and what resources are needed to better understand, or if I need to reteach the lesson. The last assessment is a summative assessment. I use projects, and end of unit assessments. These come after the lessons to asses their understanding of the unit. Students are involved in their own learning because they are able to learn from each other through discussions as well as understanding where they may need additional support in. Through assessment, students are given feedback on their work, and this provides expectations from them and their work. Some external factors that can impact my choices in assessments are their own learning goals (RTI), district benchmarks/assessments or personal needs from a student. I had one student in RTI, and her assessments differed from the class because she needed support and growth towards her own goals. Her own goals were different from the class, and I provided the supports to ensure she met her own personal goals. In addition, my school has students take a district assessment, and this assessment compares grades throughout our district to assess the progress of the lesson and program (HMH). Lastly, I have given some personalized assessments for students because their families were concerned about their learning. I accommodated and differentiated certain assessments to elicit growth from my student, before transitioning them to other assessments. Overall, assessments are just as important as a lesson, and should always be valid, accurate and flexible.

For this part, YOU ARE ALLOWED TO use MICROSOFT COPILOT ONLY. Run the following prompt for assessment – you need to use the complete prompt and individualize by completing the [brackets].

Domain	Highly Effective (H)	Effective (E)	Developing (D)	Ineffective (I)
Content Knowledge Teacher understanding of OG principles & vowel‑r concepts	Demonstrates expert command of OG routines and ir/ur/er concepts; provides precise explanations of r‑controlled vowels; anticipates misconceptions and uses multiple examples (e.g., bird, fern, curl).	Demonstrates solid understanding of OG routines and vowel‑r concepts; explanations are accurate and grade‑appropriate; provides several correct examples.	Demonstrates partial understanding; explanations sometimes lack clarity or precision; examples may be limited or occasionally inaccurate.	Demonstrates insufficient understanding; explanations are unclear or incorrect; examples are missing or inaccurate.
Organization of Lesson Structure, pacing, and sequence	Lesson follows OG’s structured, cumulative sequence flawlessly; pacing is responsive; transitions between multisensory components are seamless; materials are fully prepared.	Lesson follows OG sequence with minor inconsistencies; pacing is appropriate; transitions are generally smooth; materials are ready.	Lesson shows inconsistent structure; pacing is uneven; transitions may cause confusion; materials sometimes missing or disorganized.	Lesson lacks OG structure; pacing is inappropriate; transitions are disjointed; materials are unprepared.
Presentation Skills Clarity, modeling, multisensory delivery	Provides clear, concise modeling of decoding/encoding ir/ur/er; uses multisensory routines (skywriting, tapping, blending) with precision; articulation of r‑controlled vowels is crisp and consistent.	Provides clear modeling; uses multisensory routines correctly; articulation is generally accurate.	Modeling is sometimes unclear; multisensory routines are inconsistently applied; articulation errors occasionally occur.	Modeling is unclear or incorrect; multisensory routines are absent or misused; articulation errors interfere with learning.
Student Engagement Participation, attention, multisensory involvement	Students are highly engaged; all participate in decoding, encoding, and multisensory tasks; students eagerly generate examples (e.g., “I can spell her, fur, sir*!”).	Students are consistently engaged; most participate in multisensory tasks and respond to prompts.	Engagement is inconsistent; some students participate minimally; multisensory tasks do not fully involve the group.	Students are disengaged; few participate; multisensory routines are ineffective or unused.
Pronunciation & Phonemic Accuracy Teacher modeling & student production	Teacher models precise r‑controlled vowel sounds; students consistently produce accurate pronunciations; teacher corrects errors immediately with OG language (“Listen to the vowel sound before the r”).	Teacher models accurate sounds; students generally pronounce correctly; teacher corrects most errors.	Teacher modeling is inconsistent; students show frequent pronunciation errors; corrections are sporadic.	Teacher modeling is inaccurate; students consistently mispronounce; errors go uncorrected.
Decoding Skills Reading words with ir/ur/er	Students decode ir/ur/er words fluently and accurately in isolation and connected text; self‑correct using OG strategies (tapping, chunking).	Students decode most ir/ur/er words accurately; occasional errors corrected with prompting.	Students decode with frequent errors; require repeated prompting; limited use of OG strategies.	Students cannot decode ir/ur/er words; do not use OG strategies; errors persist.
Encoding/Spelling Skills Writing words with ir/ur/er	Students spell ir/ur/er words consistently and accurately; apply generalizations (e.g., er most common at end of words); use tapping and dictation routines independently.	Students spell most ir/ur/er words correctly; apply routines with minimal prompting.	Students spell with inconsistent accuracy; rely heavily on teacher support; routines applied inconsistently.	Students cannot spell ir/ur/er words; routines not used; errors show no understanding of patterns.
Error Correction & Feedback Use of OG‑aligned corrective feedback	Provides immediate, specific, OG‑aligned feedback (“Let’s tap it out together… what vowel sound do you hear before the r?”); students revise accurately.	Provides timely, accurate feedback; students correct most errors.	Feedback is inconsistent or vague; students correct some errors but misunderstandings persist.	Feedback is absent or incorrect; students do not correct errors.
Student Independence & Transfer Application beyond the lesson	Students independently apply ir/ur/er knowledge in reading, writing, and unfamiliar contexts; demonstrate metacognitive awareness (“I know it’s er because it’s at the end”).	Students apply skills in familiar contexts; some transfer to new tasks with prompting.	Students apply skills only during guided practice; limited transfer to new tasks.	Students do not apply skills; no evidence of transfer.

What did you learn using this prompt?

For my school, we use Orton-Gillingham (OG) as a program to help students learn to read, “The Science of Reading”. Most teachers are trained for this program and is used for small groups, pull-out programs and with the entire class. My school implements this program and we found it with the use of data, that students were able to read and write more fluently. Many of the ELL students at my school work either one to one, or in a small group once a day, or depending on their placement. I utilize OG in my classroom and I also work with a OG mentor. After looking at this chart, it has made me realize that there are many components to this program for both students, and for me as a teacher. I like that I also have a rubric and checklist to follow so that this ensures that my students are always being supported in their learning needs. I like that this chart broke down each category from decoding, encoding, error correction to student independence. I will be using this rubric and chart because these components dive deeper than just learning the concept and skill. It also accounts for application and transfer of this beyond the lesson.

Reference:

Celce-Murcia, M. (2013). Teaching English as a Second or Foreign Language. Fourth Edition.

Peer Responses:

Hi S.!

I enjoyed reading your discussion and agree with your points! I liked when you mentioned, “In other words, cultural proficiency supports linguistic proficiency being used appropriately within L2 sociocultural norms.” I agree with this because in order for students to communicate effectively, students need to understand why they are using the language. From the textbook, Celce-Murcia mentioned an example that reminded me of your post! She noted that a simple “thank you” can just be said, but if a speaker does not know the complexities behind that phrase, it is not communicated effectively. As teachers, we need to ensure that students know how to read and write, but also the “why.” We need to use what they already know and possess as a foundation to their learning. Our Western culture can be vastly different or similar to the students, and we can not assume. We need to provide the proper supports that ensure students have a strong understanding of both their own and new cultural and linguistic concepts.

Hi M!

I enjoyed reading your discussion! I also read your thoughts about the AI prompt and wanted to share what I learned! At my school, we have PDs that use AI, and I found this tip to be helpful! When you noted, “I had some difficulty filling the prompt but found that the specific wording within the prompt was helpful in creating specific elements of the generation” it made me reflect on when I first started using AI too. It is hard and sometimes a bit frustrating to get a specific answer. I use the AIM METHOD:

1. Actor (Who is the AI supposed to be?)

Assign a specific role/person

Example: “Act as a 2nd grade teacher of 20 students, ranging in different math proficiencies”

2. Input (What is the Context?)

Provide background information the AI needs to complete the task.

Example: Students are having difficulty with adding up to 20, using the number line.

3. Mission (What is the Goal?)

State exactly what you want the AI to do, including all the specifics you want

Example: Create a worksheet that reteaches the skill of adding up to 20 using the number line.

I hope that helps!

Hi D.!

I liked reading your discussion and agree with your points! I liked when you noted, “I try to involve students by having them complete self-assessments, reflect on their work, and use teacher feedback to improve over time rather than focusing only on a final grade.” Sometimes I catch myself providing ample feedback to students towards the end of the lesson. I find that that this is not as effective as giving them feedback during the lesson. It makes me think, “What is the point in providing support once the assessment and lesson is completed?” Yes, feedback is important, but it is also important for students to be given support overtime. This way, students can fix and learn from their errors in the moment rather than giving a low grade and not understanding their errors.

TESOL Graduate Student at Touro University Shobha Kunjbeharry on Curriculum Design vs. Instructional Design using AI Analysis in EDDN 635

I believe that highlighting an exemplary discussion board post does more than celebrate one candidate’s success; it sets a visible, attainable standard that shows the whole course cohort what thoughtful, well-developed thinking looks like in practice. When I feature one of my candidates’ work on my blog, I want them to feel that the often invisible labor of reflection, synthesis, and pedagogical reasoning behind a strong post has truly been seen. I also believe that celebrating progress, not just polished perfection, builds a culture where candidates learn from and encourage one another rather than viewing the discussion board as a box to check. Ultimately, I share this work because I want my future educators to know their voices matter, modeling the same encouraging, growth-oriented feedback I hope they will one day offer their own students.Beyond the present cohort, my blog also serves as a living repository, offering future students clear and exemplary models to draw inspiration from as they develop their own voices.

My name is Shobha Kunjbeharry, a TESOL graduate student at Touro University, committed to supporting multilingual students through equitable and engaging instruction. My interests include curriculum design, language development, culturally responsive teaching, and the integration of technology and Artificial Intelligence to enhance learning outcomes. I strive to improve my knowledge to create an inclusive educational environment that empowers students to achieve academic success while valuing their linguistic and cultural strengths.

“Through studying curriculum mapping and AI Integration, I have learned that effective curriculum design requires both intentional planning and reflective analysis. AI serves as an analytical partner in examining standard alignment, identifying gaps, and supporting decision-making for instruction. However, the need for educators’ expertise is not eliminated but rather becomes expanded, bringing the best outcomes for everyone.” Shobha Kunjbeharry,

Moduel 1 – DB 1

Part 1: Curriculum Design vs. Instructional Design

Grade 3 ELA/ENL Unit Using Dear Primo: A Letter to My Cousin

Curriculum design	Instructional design
Establishes the unit focusing on context Dear Primo by comparing perspectives across cultures	Teacher plans daily lessons using read aloud, partner discussions, small groups, and graphic organizers.
Alignment to NY State Next Generation 3R2, 3R3 and 3R6 (NYSED, 2017).	Selection of strategies such as background knowledge, sentence frames, Think-Pair-Share, and Role Play.
Central goals of summarizing, identifying main ideas and narrators, and comparing setting.	Allocation of vocabulary activities and close reading task. Background uses of key vocabulary words and make personal connections. Provides scaffolding opportunities such as visuals, modeling, slow speech and bilingual support.
Determine and define sequence of learning throughout the unit with expected outcomes for students and assessments	Developing and designing formative activities to student population such as exit tickets and comprehension questions.

Part 2: Your Own Reading First (3-4 sentences)

I reviewed the HMH curriculum for Grade 3, which focuses on the unit Dear Primo: A Letter to My Cousin. This unit emphasizes comparing experiences, cultures, and different perspectives through literary texts. The learning objectives for students are to help them identify themes, analyze characters, and make connections between their own lives and the lives of others. The expectations for students are to use evidence from texts to support their comprehension and participate in oral discussions and writing.

Part 3: AI- Generated Summary

The main goal and scope of this unit are to explore how individuals compare different experiences, lifestyles, and cultural perspectives. Through the central text Dear Primo, students examine the lives of two cousins living in different countries (the US and Mexico). The scope of the unit prioritizes developing essential literacy skills, including summarizing key events, identifying narrators and shifting points of view, and describing character traits and settings. Additionally, students are expected to analyze text and graphic features to deepen their comprehension of cultural contexts. Two highly relevant alignments to the New York State Next Generation ELA Learning Standards include:

3R2: Determine a theme or central idea and explain how it is supported by key details; summarize portions of a text.
- Application: This matches the unit’s core requirement for students to track repeated details across the letters to summarize the text and determine the overarching theme of cultural connection.
3R6: Discuss how the reader’s point of view or perspective may differ from that of the author, narrator, or characters in a text.
- Application: Because the book is written in an epistolary (letter-sharing) format, this standard directly addresses the instructional focus on identifying different narrators and comparing characters’ distinct perspectives.

Part 4: Compare and Critique (4-6 Sentences)

My analysis and AI Summary share similar objectives because they both identified comparing perspectives, summarized events, and understanding the narrators and characters’ primary goals. The confirmation of standards was shared by AI for 3R2 and 3R6, and not 3R3. One difference was AI sharing the challenges for multilingual learning, which is the dual load of cultural schema and contrastive vocabulary. MLs require extensive support to bridge the vocabulary gap when making connections to their own lives into formal English academic writing and discussion. Recommendations for scaffolds aligned with support: I include sentence frames and visuals, but AI uses the keyword “culturally responsive scaffolding”. AI expanded my thinking about language support for ENLs and MLs; however, Specific directions and files to understand the unit I will be using were required in the search to get the best outcomes using AI as an analytical partner.

Peer responses.

#1 Hi J.,

You shared a great comparison on your critique versus AI critique. You mentioned AI gives you a better depth into the Unit and is not oversimplified as your summary. I agree that using AI to deepen our knowledge and expand on what we offer to students can be helpful in teaching and preparing them with a wide scope of content areas. When students are given more information that is appropriate to their Grade level and proficiency, they can grasp sufficient information to bring understanding of the object, which is a positive influence on the best outcomes for all students.

Thanks, Shobha

#2 Hi T.,

You shared some great information on identifying curriculum design and instructional design. These two go hand in hand and significantly increase participation and productivity of students’ outcomes. You also shared great instructional methods to encourage student outcomes by providing opportunities for scaffolding, which is an important component for multilingual learners. Emphasizing culturally responsive teaching is essential for English Language Learners, which helps them to connect using background knowledge and make meaningful connections. A key point in your analysis and AI that I thought is imperative is the inclusion of family relationships; this is a big part of students’ outcomes and creates a sense of belonging and motivation to learn in an environment that values community.

Thanks, Shobha

#3 Hi M.,

“Curriculum design tells teachers what and when to teach a topic. Instructional design allows teachers to create lessons, supplement the curriculum, and deliver instruction.” These two sentences stand out to me and hit exactly the difference between these two topics and how they go hand in hand with each other. I watched a video shared by our professor on the 4 Ts of Curriculum Design framework, which includes Topic, Task, Target, and Text (EL Education, 2018). These are 4 simple concepts for how to design a curriculum and build knowledge for students. This framework works in an interrelationship, helping teachers connect and create the scaffolding. To simplify it, the curriculum offers the ingredients to a standard, and teachers use those ingredients based on individual outcomes in proportion to students’ expectations.

Thanks, Shobha

Reference:

EL Education. (2018). Curriculum Design: The 4 Ts. Touro University. YouTube Video.

Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (2020). HMH Into Reading: Grade 3 teacher’s Guide. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.

NYSED. (2017). New York Next Generation English Language Arts Learning Standards. https://www.nysed.gov/sites/default/files/programs/standards-instruction/nys-next-generation-ela-standards.pdf

Touro University TESOL Candidate Marissa Diveris’ Fieldwork for EDPN 673 – Methods and Materials for Teaching English as a Second Language

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.

Marissa Diveris is a high school social studies ENL teacher with four years of teaching experience. She earned her undergraduate degree in History Secondary Education from St. Joseph’s University and is completing her master’s degree in TESOL at Touro University. Her professional interests include multilingual learner advocacy, culturally responsive teaching, and making rigorous social studies content accessible through intentional language supports and scaffolding.

This fieldwork project focused on observing and analyzing instructional practices used to support English Language Learners (ELLs) across a variety of classroom settings. The observations took place in a suburban high school setting with diverse English learners across grade levels. Observations were conducted in four classrooms, including ENL and integrated co-teaching environments in social studies, mathematics, and science. In addition, interviews were conducted with two teachers and two English learners to gain insight into both instructional approaches and student experiences. The purpose of this fieldwork was to examine how educators adapt instruction to meet the linguistic and academic needs of diverse learners, while also promoting engagement and language development. Through the combination of classroom observations and interviews, several key themes emerged, including the use of scaffolding, the role of academic language, the importance of student interaction, and the need to balance support with increasing independence. These findings provide valuable insight into effective practices for supporting English learners and have important implications for my own teaching as an ENL social studies educator. This analysis will examine how these themes emerged across both instructional practices and student experiences.

“My journey through the TESOL program at Touro strengthened both my instructional practices and my understanding of multilingual learners as assets within the classroom. The program challenged me to think more critically about equity, language development, and the importance of creating rigorous but accessible learning experiences for all students.”
Marissa Diveris, Touro University TESOL Candidate

Fieldnotes

Marissa Diveris Spring 26Fieldwork Paper Download

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.

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

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:

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 analysis Download

Touro University TESOL Candidate Madison Derwin’s Field Log

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

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

This assignment focuses on exploring and analyzing K-12 pedagogical approaches, methods, and strategies relevant to teaching English to speakers of other languages (ESOL) in diverse classrooms. The objective is to develop a deep understanding of the strategies that effectively convey state and professional standards-based curricula to students from different age groups, ability levels, and cultural backgrounds. Additionally, the assignment aims to facilitate the development, adaptation, and evaluation of materials for lesson planning and assessment.

Originally from Long Island, New York, Madison Derwin holds a bachelor’s degree in Inclusive Childhood Education and is currently pursuing a graduate degree in TESOL. As an aspiring educator, Madison’s goal is to inspire students to reach their full potential through engaging lessons and hands-on learning experiences.

Ms. Derwin clearly connected her fieldwork to the course objective on second language teaching methods. Her interactions with the ENL-certified educator and attention to culturally responsive practices demonstrate strong professional engagement. Her descriptive focus on practical strategies such as scaffolding and visual aids, along with her recognition of the importance of inclusion and collaboration, reflects a thoughtful and intentional approach to her teaching observations.

“The only dreams impossible to reach are the ones you never pursue.”
Michael Declan

Madison FIELDWORK EDPN 673 Download

Touro University Bilingual Teaching Certificate Candidate Sandy Gonzalez using Total Physical Response for Math

Celebrating Exemplar Work in TESOL
One of the most rewarding aspects of my role as faculty at Touro University’s TESOL & Bilingual department is the opportunity to highlight and honor the exceptional work of our students – work that embodies the high standards we aspire to our TESOL & Bilingual Education department under the leadership of Seongshin Kim, Ph.D. – Chair/Associate Professor for TESOL, Bilingual Education, & Teaching Literacy. When students grant permission to publish their work, they allow us to share model examples of excellence that illustrate the effective integration of theory and practice in our field. This act not only celebrates their achievement but also fuels a commitment to continuous improvement and ethical teaching practices.

The Value of Publishing Student Work
By publishing exemplary student work, we:
1. Validate their efforts and creativity: Recognizing outstanding accomplishments reinforces a culture of achievement and motivates others to strive for excellence.
2. Showcase authentic application of learning: These works serve as tangible examples of how theory—especially historical perspectives on language acquisition and current teaching methods—translates into effective classroom practice.
3. Promote transparency and scholarly dialogue: Sharing these projects encourages constructive discussion among educators and candidates, furthering professional growth and innovation.

Connection to AAQEP Standards
Linking this practice to AAQEP standards emphasizes the importance of quality assurance and rigorous assessment in educational programs. AAQEP champions initiatives that demonstrate:
1. Evidence-based Practice: The publication of exemplar work acts as concrete evidence of effective instructional strategies and culturally responsive teaching—key tenets of Touro’s TESOL paradigm.
2. Continuous Improvement: By openly sharing high-quality work, we establish benchmarks that peer educators and teacher candidates can analyze and aspire to, fostering an environment of consistent professional development.
3. Accountability and Transparency: This process highlights our commitment to ethical practices and quality instruction, reinforcing the values that AAQEP standards advocate.
In essence, when exemplary student projects are disseminated publicly (with the proper permissions), they serve as motivational tools and proof points for the quality and impact of our instructional approaches. By publishing work produced in such a dynamic and impactful course, I am not just celebrating student success; I am also providing a clear, accessible model of how thoughtful integration of differentiated instruction and cultural responsiveness can lead to authentic excellence for aspiring TESOL & Bilingual teachers.

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

Sandy Gonzalez holds a B.S. in Legal Studies from Post University and an M.S. in Education from St. John’s University. As a Special Education Secondary Generalist since 2013, she has always been dedicated to supporting diverse learners. Already fluent in Spanish, Portuguese, and English, intermediate in Italian, and now learning French, she is currently pursuing an Advanced Bilingual Teaching Certificate at Touro University to better serve the growing needs of English Language Learners in her high school. Her passion for language learning and inclusive education drives her commitment to empowering students with the skills and confidence to succeed.

Touro University has reinforced my passion for bilingual education while allowing me to grow as an educator enhancing my teaching strategies to better support the diverse linguistic backgrounds of my students.
Sandy Gonzalez,
Touro University Bilingual Teaching Certificate Candidate

Mini Lesson Vimeo Video Link:

CLICK HERE for Methods Presentation Slides Canva Link

Sandy Gonzales Methods Presentation_Sandy Gonzalez Download

Oralia Lainez-Tutka, a Touro University TESOL candidate on Curriculum Development and Technology

EDDN 635 Curriculum Development and Classroom Management in the Technology Era

The assignment was to create a list of technology tools that not only aid teachers in instructional strategies and curriculum development but can also facilitate community outreach and engagement. I selected 9 tools that I currently use and explained how each tool can be used in an educational context for ELL students and for community outreach within my school. I used a padlet as I felt it was the best way to highlight each tool/website, it provides a clear view of the link, description and analysis. The assignment helped me further understand how many technological tools are used within a classroom.

Oralia Lainez-Tutka is a 4th year middle school Spanish teacher. This is her second semester with Touro University through the TESOL program.

“Although I have just begun my Touro journey, I do feel it is a positive one. My classes have supported my teaching, provided ample support, and I have been able to practice strategies and apply knowledge from my classes to my teaching. ”
Lainez-Tutka, TESOL candidate, Touro University

Touro University TESOL Candidate Kenia Torres’ Tech Tools

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 potential 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 fieldwork.

Kenia Torres is a Bilingual Kindergarten teacher in the Brentwood Union Free School District. She received her Bachelor’s Degree in Child Studies with a concentration in Speech Communication from Saint Joseph’s University, a Bilingual Extension from Touro University, and is currently enrolled in a TESOL program at Touro University. Kenia is passionate about developing a classroom community that allows all children to achieve their academic and personal goals. In the future, she would like to pursue an educational leadership role to empower educators and students to catalyze school success. A quote that reflects Kenia’s vision of the educational field is: “Tell me and I forget, teach me and I remember, involve me and I learn.”- Benjamin Franklin

The assignment for EDDN 635 Curriculum Development and Classroom Management in the Technology Era was: To curate a list of technology tools that not only aid in instructional strategies and curriculum development but also facilitate community outreach and engagement.

Introduction: Briefly discuss the importance of integrating technology in education and its possible role in using it for community engagement.

Selection of Technology Tools: Choose 9 technology tools, ensuring a mix that includes tools for both educational purposes and community outreach. These tools could range from educational platforms and apps to communication and social media tools.

Tool Descriptions: Provide a concise description of each tool, highlighting its key features and the URL. Explain how each tool can be used in an educational context and for community engagement.

Practical Applications: Illustrate practical examples of how these tools can be integrated into teaching, curriculum design, and/or community outreach initiatives. Examples could include using social media for parent-teacher communication, blogs for student projects showcased to the community, or collaborative platforms for community-based projects.

Reflection and Analysis: Reflect on the potential impact of these tools on enhancing educational experiences and community relations.
Analyze any challenges or limitations in implementing these tools for both educational and outreach purposes.

Format and Submission: Choose of format of your choice – possibly a Storybook, Padlet, Flipgrid etc.