Tag: TESOL

Touro University TESOL Graduate Student Shobha Kunjbeharry on Evidence-Based Instructional Decision Making

From a TESOL teacher education perspective, this discussion board is not a routine comprehension check. It is a structured rehearsal of evidence-based instructional decision making, with a clear emphasis on how assessment is conceptualized, enacted, and interpreted within the SIOP Model.

In EDDN 637 Second Language Learners and the Content Areas, Touro University, GSE TESOL candidates 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.

First, the prompt requires candidates to translate theory into assessable classroom practice. When candidates identify activities from Practice and Application (Short et al., 2017), they are not simply listing strategies. They are implicitly addressing a core assessment question: What observable student behaviors will demonstrate both content understanding and language development? In this sense, activities function as embedded formative assessments. For example, when a candidate plans structured interaction, hands-on tasks, or application exercises, they are defining opportunities where student language output becomes measurable evidence. The requirement to cite the text with page numbers reinforces that these decisions are anchored in a validated instructional framework rather than intuition.

Second, the teaching scenarios component develops interpretive assessment literacy. By analyzing classroom scenarios and quoting directly, candidates practice identifying where instruction succeeds or fails in generating usable evidence of learning. This is critical for professional growth because effective TESOL educators must move beyond asking whether an activity occurred to evaluating whether it elicited language that can be assessed. The scenarios model how instructional moves produce or limit student output, which, in turn, determines the quality of the formative assessment data available to the teacher.

Third, the writing sample analysis is the most explicit assessment task. Here, candidates engage in diagnostic assessment and calibration. By selecting three grade-level samples and comparing them to their own multilingual learners, candidates confront a central professional challenge: distinguishing between developmental language variation and instructional gaps. The requirement to include a screenshot is not procedural. It functions as evidence validation, ensuring that claims about student writing are grounded in observable data rather than generalized impressions. This mirrors professional expectations in TESOL contexts, where assessment claims must be tied to artifacts.

Equally important, this task builds comparative judgment, a key but often underdeveloped skill. Candidates must analyze similarities and differences across samples, which supports their ability to place student performance along a continuum rather than in binary categories. This directly informs instructional planning, particularly in aligning writing tasks with language proficiency levels.

Finally, the discussion board as a whole cultivates assessment coherence. Candidates are required to connect three domains that are often treated separately:

  • Instructional design (SIOP activities)
  • Observational analysis (teaching scenarios)
  • Student evidence (writing samples)

In Shobha Kunjbeharry’s well-developed response, these elements converge into a unified understanding: instruction produces evidence, evidence informs assessment, and assessment drives instructional refinement. In my view, this is the central professional shift the assignment is designed to produce. It moves candidates away from viewing assessment as an endpoint and toward understanding it as an embedded, continuous process within TESOL pedagogy.

A candidate who engages this discussion board at such a high level is therefore not only demonstrating comprehension of the SIOP model but is actively developing the capacity to design, elicit, interpret, and justify assessment evidence in linguistically diverse classrooms.

Biography: Shobha Kunjbeharry is a TESOL graduate student at Touro University with a strong focus on supporting culturally and linguistically diverse English Language Learners. As an educator, I amshe is passionate about creating inclusive, engaging, and language-rich learning environments that promote academic success for all students. Her work emphasizes literacy development, vocabulary instruction, and culturally responsive teaching practices.

My Journey at Touro University has strengthened my commitment to teaching multilingual learners by giving me tools to connect language, culture, and academic success in meaningful ways to make sense of the science of reading in today’s classroom.

Shobha Kunjbeharry, TESOL graduate student at Touro University

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

Planning tasks so that students can experience new knowledge in various ways by practicing with new materials is the goal that encourages higher thinking order (Short et al, pg. 183, 2017). Activities that will build on students’ background knowledge and enhance practice time, while allowing both practice and application, incorporating all four language skills: reading, writing, listening, and speaking.

Using Sentence stems and language frames to help students articulate thoughts and ideas is an activity that will advance student proficiency in English, linking language functions pg. 184. This activity helps students move from using simple sentences to a more detailed expression, for example, “I believe that _” to the more detailed “In my opinion, _ is right/wrong because _,” and finally to the more complex form (Short et al, pg. 184, 2017).

Hands-on materials and manipulatives provide students with practice with new knowledge. “Students have greater chances of mastering content and concept skills when they are given multiple opportunities to practice in relevant, meaningful ways.” (Short et al, pg. 185, 2017). Using practice-enhancing sessions with manipulatives and guidance with feedback helps students know how well they are doing. Handson’s strategies that incorporate counting, classifying, stacking, experimenting with, observing, rearranging, and dismantling are helpful for English Learners to learn materials. An example shared in chapter 7 is that an individual in a math class should have practice with paper and pen before they can draw geometric shapes as a content objective (Short et al, pg. 186, 2017). These activities help to reduce language load for students, thus providing concrete knowledge through experience.

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

The three teaching scenarios highlight the importance of how different instructional approaches impact multilingual learners’ language development, engagement, and understanding of the content.

Mrs. Bertoni’s lesson demonstrates that modelling alone is not enough; students need active participation, discussion, and hands-on experience to understand content and language objectives. She used visuals and oral explanation without a practice activity.   “Students were mostly passive while they copied her illustrations from the board. Listening to a teacher read is not a practice activity” (Short et al, pg.198, 2017).

Mr. Sherbiny’s Lesson demonstrates meaningful content of language application and practice with the strongest example of effective instruction because it integrates hands-on learning and student interaction. He uses manipulatives in small settings and checks for understanding by “each group drawing to show movement and shared with the class pg.198. He also asked students to raise their hands when they hear a key term during a low literacy whole classroom read-aloud from the science textbook (Short et al, pg. 195, 2017). He uses students in demonstrations of the sun, moon, and earth with manipulatives to represent each in different sizes with sentence frames to support comprehension, pg. 195. This leads to thinking and using real-life examples where something rotates and revolves. This lesson incorporates all language domains of listening, speaking, reading, and writing, giving it a comprehensive teaching approach that supports deeper learning for multilingual learners.

Mrs. Aliheri’s lesson is lacking proper scaffolding and effective implementation.She attempted to use technology, but did not provide enough support for what students see in the video. She asked students, “When you see a revolution, I want you to raise one finger. When you see a rotation, raise two fingers.” Students were confused, and she replayed the clip again pg. 196. The word card activity provided was confusing and quickly executed, which shows poor planning pg. 197. I do believe she had a good activity to help understand the difference between rotation and revolution. Still, she did not provide enough activity to practice new knowledge and demonstrate with examples. Her only background knowledge was a video clip in which students did not receive scaffolded instructional support to comprehend what they saw (Short et al, 2017). Students did some partner reading and asked students to make sentences using manipulatives, but due to a lack of scaffolding, students could not pg. 200.

  • 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://curriculum.learnalberta.ca/cdn/resources/m/eslapb/writingsamples/grade1_level3.html

The writing sample chosen is Grade 1, Level 3. The analysis of the chosen writing sample shows that students can write multiple sentences to form a simple story using vocabulary familiar to the topic. Students demonstrate emerging grammar and sentence structure with some errors, for example, “It raining to much”, “She not get wet.” It shows organizations and the sequencing of ideas. Students at level 3 can produce simple sentences and connect ideas, but with some errors. Similarities are that ML students can produce simple sentences, show phonetic spelling (to, too), make grammatical errors (verb tense, syntax, semantics), and rely on familiar topics with visuals. Differences at levels 1 and 2 may produce shorter responses and depend on teacher guidance with limited vocabulary. Students in all three levels completed words, sentences, and connecting ideas. Using explicit instructions and scaffolds such as sentence frames, word banks, repetition, and visual prompts will be a great benefit to help students move to complex sentences and accurate writing.

Reference:

Alberta. (n.d.). Supporting English as an Additional Language Learners. Tools, Strategies, and Resources. https://curriculum.learnalberta.ca/cdn/resources/m/eslapb/writing_samples.html

Short et al. (2017). Making Content Comprehensible for English Learners. THE SIOP MODEL. Pearson.

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-2Download
Evanglia D_Digraph SlideshowDownload

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:

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

By Dr. Jasmin (Bey) Cowin

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

Morphological Awareness Within the Science of Reading

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

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

References

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

MS in Teaching English to Speakers of Other Languages

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

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

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

Ms. Taranto wrote in her fieldwork paper:

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

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

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

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

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

637 Field Work Paper Fall fieldwork (1)Download

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

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

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

Instructional Materials Critique and Redesign

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

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

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

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

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

EDPN 673 Instructional Material Critique (1).docxDownload

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

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

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

Instructional context and assignment purpose

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

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

Explicit teaching of Copilot as an instructional design tool

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

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

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

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

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

Materials Critique Redesign XavierDownload

Touro TESOL Candidate Madison Derwin’s Field Observations and Reflections

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

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

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

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

EDDN 635 Reflection Paper Madison Fall 25Download

Madison Derwin 673 fall 25 MultimediaDownload

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


This assignment, Instructional Method Assignment – Teaching a Mini-Lesson to an ML Audience, required creating a simulated teaching video that demonstrates one specific language teaching method from our course readings. This is a pretend lesson where you act as the teacher presenting to an imaginary multilingual learner audience for EDPN 673 Methods and Materials for Teaching English as a Second Language. This course provides a historical overview of second language acquisition theories and teaching methods. Students learn how to apply current approaches, methods and techniques, with attention to the effective use of materials, in teaching English as a second language. Students will engage in the planning and implementation of standards-based ESL instruction, which includes differentiated learning experiences geared to students’ needs. Emphasis is placed on creating culturally responsive learning environments. Includes 15 hours of field work.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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