#technology – 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.

Touro University TESOL Candidate Ishrat Jahan’s Science of Reading Insights in EDDN 637 & EDDN 635 Techtool Resource

By Dr. Jasmin Cowin: Discussion boards are an effective starting point for a sequential introduction to the Science of Reading because they give candidates a low-stakes, asynchronous space to work through foundational constructs, such as vocabulary’s role within the Big 6, while grounding their analysis in authentic texts. As Ishrat Jahan’s Science of Reading Insights on Esperanza Rising demonstrates, candidates can practice applying frameworks like brick-and-mortar words, cite course readings, and articulate instructional moves in writing, which makes their conceptual understanding visible to the instructor while giving candidates choices in choosing their own texts.

In addition, the required peer responses build a professional learning community as candidates refine or even revise their thinking (e.g., reconsidering whether brick-or-mortar words pose greater challenges for multilingual learners) through dialogue with colleagues. This written, iterative format is ideal early in the semester because it requires careful reading, evidence-based reasoning, and academic language development before candidates are asked to perform pedagogically. Later in the semester, short video demonstrations are folded in because they require candidates to transfer theoretical knowledge into observable practice, such as explicitly teaching Tier 2 vocabulary in context, modeling phoneme-grapheme mapping, or demonstrating a decoding routine as they would with real learners.. This sequence from written analysis to recorded enactment ensures that candidates’ SoR knowledge is not merely theoretical but demonstrably applicable, mirroring the transfer from declarative to procedural knowledge that we expect them to foster in their own students.

Ishrat Jahan’s Bio: I earned my Bachelor of Science in Childhood Education with a bilingual extension in Bangla. Currently, I work in an elementary school dual-language classroom, supporting students from diverse cultural backgrounds and varying levels of English proficiency. To strengthen my ability to support multilingual learners and expand my professional knowledge, I am pursuing a master’s degree in TESOL at Touro University, where the flexible schedule and practical coursework have helped prepare me to better meet students’ academic and language needs.

“The Science of Reading has taught me that every child deserves instruction built on evidence, not assumptions. It also taught me that successful reading is not left to chance-it is built through explicit, systematic, and evidence-based instruction.”
Ishrat Jahan, Touro University TESOL Candidate

The DB question:

Vocabulary — The Fourth Pillar of the Big 6
Vocabulary is one of the Big 6 components of the Science of Reading and a critical lever for multilingual learner achievement. One practical entry point into vocabulary instruction is the Brick and Mortar framework, which helps teachers assess a text’s full vocabulary demand before teaching it.
Select a short text from your text anlaysis. Analyze its vocabulary complexity by identifying the following:
Brick words are specialized, content-specific terms essential for understanding the topic of the text (e.g., ecosystem, photosynthesis, denominator). These correspond to Tier 3 vocabulary in Beck, McKeown, and Kucan’s framework.
Mortar words are the general academic and functional language that holds ideas together and supports comprehension across content areas (e.g., however, as a result, evaluate, in contrast). These correspond largely to Tier 2 vocabulary.
Your post should include:

Your text excerpt, cited with author, title, and page number – you must use text you will be using for your text analysis assignment next week.
A list of the brick words you identified and a brief explanation of why each is essential for comprehension of this text.
A list of the mortar words you identified and the comprehension or reasoning function each one serves.
A reflection on which word type poses the greater challenge for your multilingual learners and what one instructional move you would make before reading to reduce that barrier.

Connect your analysis explicitly to the Science of Reading component of vocabulary instruction and cite at least one course reading in your response.

Using insights from Robust Vocabulary InstructionLinks to an external site. to discuss how explicitly teaching vocabulary can enhance multilingual learners’ comprehension and engagement with complex texts.

Ishrat Jahan’s Science of Reading Insights in EDDN 637

Text excerpt: For my text analysis, I selected an excerpt from Esperanza Rising by Pam Muñoz Ryan. I focused on the “Los Melones” section. In this scene, Esperanza, Miguel, Isabel, and Marta discuss the separate labor camps and the unfair conditions faced by farmworkers. Marta explains, “We all live separate and work separate. They don’t mix us” (Ryan, 2000, p. 62). She later explains that workers may need to strike to have better conditions. She said, “They don’t want us banding together for higher wages or better housing” (Ryan, 2000, p. 62). In this part of the story, Esperanza is learning about the living and working conditions of migrant workers in California.

Brick words identified:

Wages: This word is important because it explains the money workers earn for their labor. Students need to understand wages to understand why the workers want better treatment.
Conditions: This word refers to the workers’ living and working situation. It helps students understand what Marta means when she says workers want “better conditions.”
Owners: This word refers to the people who control the farms and make decisions about workers’ pay, housing, and treatment. In this excerpt, the word “they” refers to owners. This word is important to know because it does not directly state that the word “they” refers to owners, and it is a pronoun that many students might not know about.
Housing: In this excerpt, housing refers to the cabins and living conditions provided to farmworker families. It helps students understand why the workers are unhappy and why they want change.
Strike: This word is especially important because it explains the action workers may take by refusing to work together to demand fair treatment.

These words are important because they are connected to the main social and historical issues of the story, including migrant farm work, poverty, and unfair living conditions. Without understanding these words, students may understand that the characters are upset, but they may not fully understand why the workers are separated or why they are considering a strike.

Mortar words identified:

Banding together: This word helps students understand the idea of workers joining as one group.
Separate: This word shows how the farm owners keep different groups of workers apart.
Higher: This comparison word shows that the workers want more pay than they currently receive.
Or: This word connects two possible needs: better wages or better housing.
Don’t want: This phrase helps students understand the motivation of the owners. The owners do not want workers to unite because they may ask for fairer treatment.
Better: This is a comparison word that helps students understand that the workers want improved wages, housing, and treatment.

Reflection:

I think mortar words may be more challenging for multilingual learners than brick words because they represent abstract, functional language rather than concrete objects. Brick words usually have a clear visual representation, while mortar words require students to understand logical relationships and cognitive processes that can not be easily pictured. Mortar words can also change meaning depending on the context. For example, students may learn words like wages, housing, and strike with pictures, examples, and student-friendly definitions. However, words and phrases such as or, higher, and banding together may be harder to teach because their meanings depend on the context. These words are less concrete, and students may not understand their deeper meaning without support. They show relationships, comparison, action, and motivation in the sentence. If students do not understand these words, they may not fully understand the context of the passage.

One instructional move I would make before reading is to use a simple cause-and-effect chart with visuals. I would write “Workers are separated” on one side and “They can not share information or organize for better wages and housing” on the other side. Then, I would introduce the sentence starter, “If workers join together, they might________.” Students would use the sentence starter to discuss their ideas. This would help students practice the mortar language while also preparing them to understand the problem of the text.

Connect your analysis explicitly to the Science of Reading component of vocabulary instruction and cite at least one course reading in your response.

Connection to the Science of Reading: This Brick and Mortar analysis connects to the Science of Reading because vocabulary is an important part of language comprehension. Both types of words are important for students to understand the context of the text. For example, students need to understand brick words such as strike, wages, and housing, but they also need mortar words such as or, higher, don’t want, and better to understand the relationships and conflicts of the text. Multilingual learners may find Mortar words challenging because they are less concrete and show cause, effect, comparison, and motivation. Before reading, I would use visuals and sentence starters, such as “The owners keep workers separate because________,” to help students practice these words in context. This supports vocabulary instruction because students learn both the meaning of the words and how the words work together in a sentence. This connects to Lesaux and Galloway’s (2017) point that “word knowledge develops for students as they connect what they know about a word, in any language, with new information being taught” (p.4). Before reading, I would encourage students to connect these words or ideas to what they already know in their home language.

Using insights from Robust Vocabulary Instruction

Links to an external site. to discuss how explicitly teaching vocabulary can enhance multilingual learners’ comprehension and engagement with complex texts.

Teaching vocabulary explicitly can enhance multilingual learners’ comprehension and engagement with complex texts because it gives them access to important words before those words become barriers to comprehension. Sandora (2023) explains that traditional activities, such as looking up definitions, may only create a “superficial understanding” of words instead of the deeper knowledge students need to understand a text. To help students understand complex texts, teachers should explicitly teach important Tier 2 and Tier 3 words, especially for multilingual learners. Teachers should use simple and clear language, student-friendly definitions, visuals, examples, cognates when appropriate, and repeated opportunities to use the words in speaking and writing. For example, before reading a complex text, I would introduce a few important words in context and ask students to discuss examples and non-examples with a partner. This would help students move beyond memorizing a definition and use the words to explain ideas from the text. As Sandora (2023) explains, students should interact with words in meaningful ways that “depend their understanding,” which can make them more confident and engaged when reading challenging text.

References

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

Lesaux, N. K., & Galloway, E. P. (2017). Hallmark 1 of advanced literacies instruction: Engaging, content-rich texts. New York State Education Department. https://www.nysed.gov/sites/default/files/nov-8-nys_brief-3-of-8_summer_2017_hallmark_1final_2.pdf-a.pdf

Ryan, P. M. (2000). Esperanza Rising. Scholastic Press.

Sandora, C. (2023, January 31). Robust vocabulary instruction. Bridges to Learning. Institute for Learning. https://www.ifl-news.pitt.edu/2023/01/robust-vocabulary-instruction/

Peer Response 1: I found your post interesting because you explained that brick words can also be challenging for multilingual learners. At first, I thought mortar words were more difficult for them because their meanings can change depending on the context and students need to understand grammar and sentence structure to use them correctly. However, your post helped me realize that brick words can be just as challenging, especially when students do not have background knowledge about the topic. Although teachers can use visuals to explain brick words, students still need multiple opportunities to hear, discuss, read, and use those words in context. I also liked your idea of using visuals and a bilingual glossary before reading. This is a meaningful way to activate prior knowledge and reduce vocabulary barriers before students begin the text. Chapter 4 explains that teachers should use “a variety of techniques … to make content concepts clear” (Echevarría et al., 2017, p. 110). Your use of visuals and bilingual support connects well to this feature because students can better understand important vocabulary before reading. One suggestion I would add is having students use both brick and mortar words in sentence starters after the pre-reading activity. This would help students not only recognize the words, but also use them to explain their thinking and better understand the text.

References

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

Peer Response 2: I agree with you that mortar words can be more difficult for multilingual learners because their meanings may change depending on the context. I also liked how you gave an example of the word “difference,” which can have different meanings depending on how it is used. This example clearly shows why multilingual learners may need extra support to understand these words. I also think giving oral examples in a sentence can help reduce confusion and support students’ understanding. In addition to oral examples, visuals would be helpful, as students can see and hear the word at the same time. I support your ideas because Mr. Lew also used visuals, hands-on experiments, and clear explanations of terminology, which made the lesson easier for students to understand. His lesson was among the strongest because he provided students with multiple ways to access the content.

Peer Response 3: I also chose Esperanza Rising for my vocabulary excerpt. Vocabulary in this book may be difficult for non-Spanish speakers and multilingual learners from other language backgrounds, so they may need a lot of support. However, with the right support, the vocabulary will not feel as challenging. I also agree that brick words are easier to teach than mortar words because teachers can teach brick words with visual examples, while mortar words require a deeper understanding of the context. I think using visuals and Frayer Models would be a good way to explore mortar words because students can learn the definition, see examples and non-examples, and discuss how the word is used in different sentences. This can help students understand that the meaning of a mortar word may change depending on the context.

Your reflection also stood out to me when you explained that students at Levels 2 and 3 may struggle more with mortar words than brick words. I agree because concrete words such as campesinos or quinceañeras can be supported with pictures, while abstract words such as premonition and uneasiness require students to understand emotions and context. I liked your plan to use Frayer Models, pictures, examples, and connections to students’ own experiences before reading. This connects to your point because students need support with both brick and mortar words to understand the story. As Sandora (2023) explains, “Knowing the right vocabulary is essential for reading comprehension; students need to understand words to grasp the text’s meaning”. One additional strategy could be having students use sentence frames to practice the mortar words in discussion before reading, so they can understand both the meaning of the words and how they work in the story.

Reference

Sandora, C. (2023, January 31). Robust vocabulary instruction. Bridges to Learning. Institute for Learning. https://www.ifl-news.pitt.edu/2023/01/robust-vocabulary-instruction/Links to an external site.

EDDN 635 Techtool Resource

“Creating this Padlet taught me that technology is most meaningful when it helps multilingual learners and their families feel included, supported, and connected to learning both inside and outside the classroom.”
Ishrat Jahan, Touro University TESOL Candidate

Click here for: Ishrat Jahan’s EDDN 635 Techtool resource

Touro University TESOL Candidate Shu Jun Li’s Exemplary Instructional Material Critique & Redesign with Infographic & Fieldwork Reflection

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

The fieldwork for EDPN 673 reflects our departments practice-based and evidence-centered orientation emphasized by Association for Advancing Quality in Educator Preparation because it requires TESOL candidates to demonstrate professional learning through documented clinical engagement rather than through abstract discussion alone. Candidates must observe multilingual classrooms, conduct interviews, maintain transcripts and observational notes, analyze instructional practices, and connect findings to professional standards and course readings. The assignment therefore evaluates how candidates apply pedagogical knowledge within authentic educational settings.

A major strength of the assignment is its emphasis on structured professional observation. Candidates are required to document descriptive, reflective, and analytic notes focused on instructional strategies, classroom interaction, differentiation, assessment, and use of materials and technology. This framework supports the development of pedagogical reasoning because candidates must move beyond surface description and examine why teachers make particular instructional choices for multilingual learners. Such observational training is central to TESOL preparation because effective ESOL teaching depends upon the ability to recognize language supports, learner participation patterns, and culturally responsive instructional practices within dynamic classroom contexts.

The assignment also aligns closely with AAQEP expectations concerning evidence quality and candidate performance. Candidates must maintain interview notes or recordings, provide transcript excerpts, document interview settings, and furnish observation notes upon request. This creates a form of accountability grounded in authentic clinical evidence rather than solely in polished written products. The assignment assesses whether candidates can gather, interpret, and synthesize practice-based evidence in ways consistent with professional educator preparation.

Finally, the assignment demonstrates our Touro University, TESOL/BLE departments’ clinically rich approach to educator preparation because it requires sustained engagement with classroom realities, systematic documentation, and reflective analysis. Rather than assessing knowledge through isolated examinations or generalized discussion, the fieldwork measures how our TESOL candidates interpret instructional practice, analyze evidence, and connect observation to professional decision-making in multilingual educational environments.

Shu Jun Li: I earned my master’s degree in Early Childhood General and Special Education (Birth–Grade 2) at Touro University and currently work as an SEIT, where most of my students are bilingual learners. Working closely with bilingual and multilingual students inspired me to enroll in the Bilingual Extension Program in Special Education and Speech and Language Disabilities, which I am currently completing in my final semester. My experiences in both the classroom and coursework have strengthened my passion for creating inclusive, culturally responsive learning environments that support student growth and success. My journey at Touro and my experience in EDPN 673 strengthened my understanding of how culturally responsive teaching, scaffolding, and reflective practices can better support bilingual and multilingual learners. The course helped me become more intentional in creating inclusive learning experiences that support both language development and student success.

JuShunFieldwork Paper673 Spring26 Download

Fieldnotes by Touro University TESOL Candidate Shu Jun Li

ShuJunLi-Instructional Material Critique ^0 Redesign with Infographic Download

Using Copilot in EDPN 673 helped me better understand how technology can support bilingual and multilingual learners through differentiated and scaffolded instruction. I learned that AI tools can help create visual supports, lesson ideas, and language activities that make learning more accessible and engaging for students. At the same time, the course taught me the importance of critically reviewing and adapting AI-generated materials to ensure they are culturally responsive and aligned with students’ learning needs. This experience strengthened my confidence in using technology as a meaningful instructional support tool.
Shu Jun Li Touro University TESOL Candidate

Touro TESOL Candidate Gianna Luna’s Exemplary EDPN 673 Methods and Materials for Teaching English as a Second Language Projects

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.

“One of my biggest takeaways from this course was learning about a variety of resources and strategies that I can use to better guide my instruction and make learning more meaningful and accessible for a wide range of learners. This course also encouraged me to experiment with resources and technology tools that I had never used before, such as Copilot and creating infographics, which helped expand my creativity and thought process when designing instruction. This course helped me become more reflective and intentional in planning lessons that support both language development and academic growth for multilingual learners.”
Gianna Luna, Touro University TESOL Candidate, EDPN 673

Gianna Luna is an Inclusive Childhood Education teacher and graduate student in the TESOL program at Touro University. She currently works as a consultant teacher in an elementary school setting, providing push-in and small-group support to students with diverse learning and language needs. She is passionate about creating inclusive and supportive learning environments that help multilingual learners build confidence and academic skills.

Using Copilot throughout this assignment helped me realize how supportive technology tools can be during the lesson planning and design process. It encouraged me to experiment with resources I had never used before, such as creating infographics and using AI to brainstorm differentiated instructional ideas. I found that Copilot helped guide my thinking, organization, and creativity while still allowing me to personalize materials by redesigning them to meet the needs of my learners. This experience showed me how technology can be used as a meaningful support tool when designing accessible and engaging instruction for multilingual learners.

My experience in the TESOL program at Touro University has helped me become a more reflective and intentional educator. Throughout this course, I learned how to better support multilingual learners through meaningful scaffolds, and I also gained confidence experimenting with new instructional resources and technology tools that I can continue using in my future classroom.

Gianna Luna – Touro TESOL Candidate, EDPN 673

Gianna Luna – EDPN 673

Instructional Material Critique & Redesign with Infographic Gianna Luna Download

Field Work Paper Gianna Luna Download

Touro University TESOL Candidate Anastasios Panagiotidis’ EDPN-673 Instructional Material Critique & Redesign with Infographic

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

I designed the Instructional Material Critique & Redesign with Infographic assignment in direct alignment with my concept of ‘Education for 2060’ and its implications for teacher education in multilingual and technologically evolving classrooms. My focus within ‘Education for 2060’ is not simply the inclusion of emerging technologies in coursework, but the preparation of teacher candidates who can think critically, act reflectively, and maintain pedagogical intentionality within increasingly complex educational environments. This assignment reflects my belief that future TESOL educators must be prepared to evaluate instructional materials analytically, redesign curriculum responsively, and engage artificial intelligence through informed professional judgment rather than passive dependence.

The Instructional Material Critique & Redesign with Infographic positions AI as a pedagogical instrument that must remain secondary to teacher cognition, disciplinary expertise, and reflective decision-making. Candidates are required to identify instructional challenges, critique AI-generated outputs, revise materials through TESOL and WIDA frameworks, and justify redesign choices in relation to multilingual learner needs. In this way, the assignment preserves cognitive rigor and metacognitive engagement while simultaneously acknowledging that AI will remain part of future educational practice. Within my conception of Education for 2060, teacher education must prepare candidates not merely to use technological tools, but to interrogate them critically, adapt them responsibly, and align them with equitable instructional goals.

My emphasis on multimodal redesign and visual instructional supports is also informed by the Science of Reading and its attention to language comprehension, vocabulary development, background knowledge, and meaningful access to complex texts. For multilingual learners, literacy development requires intentional scaffolding that integrates oral language, academic discourse, visual representation, and culturally responsive instructional design. By requiring candidates to adapt materials according to WIDA proficiency levels and create multimodal supports for learners, the assignment reinforces the understanding that literacy instruction in TESOL contexts is both cognitive and sociocultural.

Ultimately, this assignment embodies my vision of ‘Education for 2060’ by positioning teacher education as intellectually rigorous, critically reflective, technologically informed, and fundamentally human-centered. The project is designed to ensure that future TESOL educators retain ownership of pedagogical reasoning even as AI becomes increasingly integrated into educational systems. Rather than diminishing professional expertise, the assignment requires candidates to strengthen their analytical capacities, deepen their metacognitive awareness, and develop the reflective habits necessary for equitable multilingual learner instruction in future educational contexts.

My TESOL teacher candidate, Anastasios Panagiotidis, submitted exemplary work showcasing his specialty as an Earth and Space Science teacher!

Anastasios Panagiotidis proudly serves the South Huntington Union Free School District as an Earth and Space Science teacher and recently obtained his tenure at Walt Whitman High School. He is passionate about creating engaging, student-centered lessons that emphasize inquiry, collaboration, and real-world connections. Anastasios strongly believes that curiosity is at the root of all learning and strives to create experiences that encourage students to ask questions, think critically, and actively engage with science. His goal is to help students develop a lasting interest in science that extends beyond the classroom. He also uses artificial intelligence as a tool to strengthen instructional materials, support differentiated instruction, and create more accessible learning experiences for multilingual learners.

Through my experience at Touro University, I have learned to combine strong instructional practices with the thoughtful use of artificial intelligence to seamlessly create engaging, accessible, and effective learning experiences that better support diverse student needs.
Anastasios Panagiotidis, Touro University TESOL Candidate

EDPN 673- Instructional Material Critique & Redesign with Infographic A_Panagiotidis Download

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 Sherman Download

Padlet Link:

Differentiated Assessment in action

Touro University TESOL Candidate Evangelia Diakoumakos’ Instructional Method Assignment for EDPN 673 – Methods and Materials for Teaching English as a Second Language

In current TESOL practice, the question is no longer whether artificial intelligence belongs in the classroom, but how it can be integrated without displacing the intellectual and pedagogical labor that defines effective teaching. This Instructional Method Assignment – Teaching a Mini-Lesson to an ML Audience for the Touro University TESOL/BLE course EDPN 673 – Methods and Materials for Teaching English as a Second Language is designed as a deliberate response to that tension. It positions AI not as a substitute for thinking, but as a collaborator within a broader ecology of embodied teaching, disciplinary knowledge, and reflective practice.

At its core, the assignment asks Touro University TESOL/BLE teacher candidates to inhabit a methodological tradition not abstractly, but physically. The simulated teaching video foregrounds the body as a site of pedagogy: gesture, proximity, pacing, and the handling of realia become constitutive elements of meaning-making. In this sense, the “method-pure” requirement is not merely technical. It is epistemological. It asks candidates to test what it means for a theory of language learning to be enacted through voice and movement in space, rather than summarized in prose.

Evangelia Diakoumakos Method Teaching Simulation Video

The written analysis, by contrast, reclaims the domain of intellectual work. Here, candidates situate their chosen method historically and theoretically, interrogating its assumptions, affordances, and limitations. This component resists the reduction of teaching to performance alone. It insists that pedagogical action must be grounded in critical awareness, particularly when methods are transported into multilingual, contemporary classrooms that differ significantly from their original contexts.

Evangelia D._ Total Physical Response (TPR) in ML instruction_ Method Analysis and Reflective Practice-2 Download

Evanglia D_Digraph Slideshow Download

Between these two domains lies the guided use of AI, specifically through structured co-creation with tools such as Microsoft Copilot. The reflective component makes visible an often invisible process: how ideas are iteratively shaped, challenged, and refined. In my view, this is where responsible AI use becomes pedagogically meaningful. Candidates are not rewarded for seamless outputs, but for evidencing discernment. They must demonstrate where AI supported clarity, where it introduced limitations, and where professional judgment required deviation from its suggestions.

The assignment, therefore, stages a productive dialectic. The physical performance of teaching resists abstraction; the analytical paper resists superficiality; and the AI collaboration resists passivity. Taken together, these elements model a form of teacher preparation that acknowledges technological change while maintaining a clear commitment to pedagogical intentionality.

Featured Touro University Candidate:

Evangelia Diakoumakos is an elementary school teacher in Brooklyn, who teaches a fourth-grade general education (ENL) class. As a teacher of a large multilingual learner population, she has developed an even stronger passion for language development and culturally responsive teaching. She is committed to creating an inclusive classroom where all students feel valued and supported in their learning.

“As a student nearing the completion of my master’s degree, one of the most rewarding experiences has been the ability to connect and apply concepts from my coursework at Touro directly to my classroom. My studies have not only transformed my instructional practices, but have also reaffirmed my love for language learning.”
Evangelia Diakoumakos, Touro University TESOL Candidate

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:

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

I am delighted to announce that our article was published!

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

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

Transdisciplinary Dialogues on AI in Education Download

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

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

Instructional Materials Critique and Redesign

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

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

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

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

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

EDPN 673 Instructional Material Critique (1).docx Download