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 Jeannine Pepe’s Science of Reading Insights for One Well: The Story of Water on Earth by Rochelle Strauss 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.
Bio: My name is Jeannine Pepe, and I am a 48-year-old educator with 26 years of teaching experience. For over 20 years, I have worked in ENL classroom settings, developing a strong commitment to supporting multilingual learners. Through my continued work with this population, I recognized the importance of further formalizing my training and expanding my instructional strategies. This led me to pursue advanced study, and I found my way to Touro University, whose TESOL program aligns closely with my professional goals and passion for supporting English language learners.
I have learned through my coursework, that the Science of Reading is a research-based approach to how students learn to read. Reading instruction should be explicit, systematic, and include phonological awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, background knowledge, and comprehension. I also learned that oral language is especially important for multilingual learners because students need to understand and use language in order to make meaning from text.
Jeannine Pepe, Touro University TESOL Candidate
DB Question: Vocabulary — The Fourth Pillar of the Big 6
Select a short text from your text analysis. Analyze its vocabulary complexity by identifying the following: brick words and mortar words. 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 Instruction to discuss how explicitly teaching vocabulary can enhance multilingual learners’ comprehension and engagement with complex texts.
For my text analysis, I selected pages 4–7 of One Well: The Story of Water on Earth by Rochelle Strauss. The text contains science concepts, diagrams, statistics, and challenging vocabulary related to freshwater, pollution, conservation, and population. It is used in EL Education’s Grade 3 Water Around the World module. This section introduces the idea that all the water on Earth is connected. For this vocabulary analysis, I selected the opening sentence:
“Imagine for a moment that all the water on Earth came from just one well” (Strauss, 2007, p. 4).
Brick Words
Water: This is the central scientific concept in the text. Students must understand that the author is discussing all forms and sources of water, not only drinking water.
Earth: This establishes the global scale of the text. The author is discussing the entire planet rather than one particular community.
Well: This word is essential because the author uses a well as a metaphor for Earth’s connected water supply. Multilingual learners may initially interpret it only as a hole from which people collect water.
Mortar Words
Imagine: This word asks readers to form a mental picture and consider a hypothetical situation.
For a moment: This phrase signals that the reader should pause and temporarily consider the author’s idea.
All: This word communicates total inclusion. It emphasizes that no source of water is excluded.
Came from: This phrase expresses a source relationship by explaining where something originates.
Just one: This phrase emphasizes limitation and unity. It supports the author’s central idea that Earth’s separate-looking water sources are interconnected.
I believe the mortar words may present the greater challenge for multilingual learners because their meanings are less concrete and often depend on how they function within a sentence. Words such as water, Earth, and well can be supported with pictures or real objects, but phrases such as came from, just one, and imagine for a moment communicate more subtle relationships and reasoning. Sandora (n.d.) explains that traditional activities such as copying dictionary definitions often produce only a superficial understanding of vocabulary. Robust vocabulary instruction instead provides student-friendly definitions and repeated opportunities for students to encounter, discuss, and apply words in meaningful contexts.
Before reading, I would display a diagram showing oceans, rivers, lakes, rain, and groundwater flowing into one large container labeled “Earth’s Well.” I would introduce the important brick and mortar words with visuals and student-friendly explanations. Students would then complete an example/non-example activity and discuss their reasoning with a partner. For example, students could decide whether a river, rainstorm, swimming pool, or ocean represents part of Earth’s “one well” and explain why. I would also introduce the sentence orally, explain the metaphor, and have students use the frame, “Imagine that all ___ came from ___.” Students could practice the frame with a partner before applying it to water. This supports the Science of Reading component of vocabulary, as students develop deeper knowledge of word meanings and relationships rather than merely memorizing definitions. Knowing how to pronounce a word is not enough; students need a deep understanding of its meaning and how it functions within a sentence. It would also increase multilingual learners’ engagement by allowing them to speak, collaborate, make visual connections, and use the vocabulary in meaningful ways. As Sandora (n.d.) emphasizes, students need opportunities to interact with words through activities such as examples and non-examples, word associations, physical actions, and writing.
References:
Echevarría, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. J. (2017). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model (5th ed.). Pearson.
Sandora, C. (n.d.). Robust vocabulary instruction. Institute for Learning, University of Pittsburgh.
Strauss, R. (2007). One well: The story of water on Earth. Kids Can Press.
Peer Response #1
Hi R.! I really like how you pointed out that Mr. Lew earned the highest rating because he stayed actively involved with students throughout the lesson. I agree with your point that simply giving students a task is not enough, especially when working with multilingual learners. Your quote that “Mr. Lew circulated through the classroom, supervising the students and answering their questions” shows that he was checking for understanding and making the input more comprehensible as students worked. That kind of teacher support is so important because students may not always ask for help unless the teacher is nearby and available.
Peer Response #2
Hi J.! I really enjoyed reading your vocabulary analysis of Esperanza Rising. I thought your choice of text was strong because the excerpt gives students both cultural vocabulary and emotional language that are important for understanding the story. I especially liked how you separated the brick words from the mortar words and explained why each type matters. Words like campesinos, vaqueros, and quinceañeras help students understand the setting, culture, and ranch life in the novel. At the same time, I agree with you that the mortar words may create a bigger challenge for multilingual learners because words like premonition, uneasiness, dismissed, and strained require students to understand feelings, tone, and deeper meaning.
Your point about using visuals, Frayer Models, and personal connections before reading really stood out to me. In my experience working with ELLs, students often understand concrete vocabulary faster when they can see a picture or connect the word to something familiar. The more abstract words usually need more discussion, modeling, and examples in context. I also liked how you connected this to the Science of Reading because vocabulary is not just about memorizing definitions. Students need repeated, meaningful exposure to words so they can use them to comprehend, discuss, and write about complex texts.
I also thought your connection to robust vocabulary instruction was important. Explicitly teaching vocabulary before reading can help multilingual learners feel more confident instead of overwhelmed by unfamiliar words. When students understand both the story-specific words and the academic language that connects ideas, they are better prepared to engage with the text. Your response reminded me that vocabulary instruction needs to be intentional, especially when a text includes cultural, academic, and emotional language all at once.
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.
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.
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.
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.
“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.”
I believe that highlighting an exemplary discussion board post does more than celebrate one candidate’s success; it sets a visible, attainable standard that shows the whole course cohort what thoughtful, well-developed thinking looks like in practice. When I feature one of my candidates’ work on my blog, I want them to feel that the often invisible labor of reflection, synthesis, and pedagogical reasoning behind a strong post has truly been seen. I also believe that celebrating progress, not just polished perfection, builds a culture where candidates learn from and encourage one another rather than viewing the discussion board as a box to check. Ultimately, I share this work because I want my future educators to know their voices matter, modeling the same encouraging, growth-oriented feedback I hope they will one day offer their own students.Beyond the present cohort, my blog also serves as a living repository, offering future students clear and exemplary models to draw inspiration from as they develop their own voices.
My name is Shobha Kunjbeharry, a TESOL graduate student at Touro University, committed to supporting multilingual students through equitable and engaging instruction. My interests include curriculum design, language development, culturally responsive teaching, and the integration of technology and Artificial Intelligence to enhance learning outcomes. I strive to improve my knowledge to create an inclusive educational environment that empowers students to achieve academic success while valuing their linguistic and cultural strengths.
“Through studying curriculum mapping and AI Integration, I have learned that effective curriculum design requires both intentional planning and reflective analysis. AI serves as an analytical partner in examining standard alignment, identifying gaps, and supporting decision-making for instruction. However, the need for educators’ expertise is not eliminated but rather becomes expanded, bringing the best outcomes for everyone.” Shobha Kunjbeharry,
Moduel 1 – DB 1
Part 1: Curriculum Design vs. Instructional Design
Grade 3 ELA/ENL Unit Using Dear Primo: A Letter to My Cousin
Curriculum design
Instructional design
Establishes the unit focusing on context Dear Primo by comparing perspectives across cultures
Teacher plans daily lessons using read aloud, partner discussions, small groups, and graphic organizers.
Alignment to NY State Next Generation 3R2, 3R3 and 3R6 (NYSED, 2017).
Selection of strategies such as background knowledge, sentence frames, Think-Pair-Share, and Role Play.
Central goals of summarizing, identifying main ideas and narrators, and comparing setting.
Allocation of vocabulary activities and close reading task. Background uses of key vocabulary words and make personal connections. Provides scaffolding opportunities such as visuals, modeling, slow speech and bilingual support.
Determine and define sequence of learning throughout the unit with expected outcomes for students and assessments
Developing and designing formative activities to student population such as exit tickets and comprehension questions.
Part 2: Your Own Reading First (3-4 sentences)
I reviewed the HMH curriculum for Grade 3, which focuses on the unit Dear Primo: A Letter to My Cousin. This unit emphasizes comparing experiences, cultures, and different perspectives through literary texts. The learning objectives for students are to help them identify themes, analyze characters, and make connections between their own lives and the lives of others. The expectations for students are to use evidence from texts to support their comprehension and participate in oral discussions and writing.
Part 3: AI- Generated Summary
The main goal and scope of this unit are to explore how individuals compare different experiences, lifestyles, and cultural perspectives. Through the central text Dear Primo, students examine the lives of two cousins living in different countries (the US and Mexico). The scope of the unit prioritizes developing essential literacy skills, including summarizing key events, identifying narrators and shifting points of view, and describing character traits and settings. Additionally, students are expected to analyze text and graphic features to deepen their comprehension of cultural contexts. Two highly relevant alignments to the New York State Next Generation ELA Learning Standards include:
3R2: Determine a theme or central idea and explain how it is supported by key details; summarize portions of a text.
Application: This matches the unit’s core requirement for students to track repeated details across the letters to summarize the text and determine the overarching theme of cultural connection.
3R6: Discuss how the reader’s point of view or perspective may differ from that of the author, narrator, or characters in a text.
Application: Because the book is written in an epistolary (letter-sharing) format, this standard directly addresses the instructional focus on identifying different narrators and comparing characters’ distinct perspectives.
Part 4: Compare and Critique (4-6 Sentences)
My analysis and AI Summary share similar objectives because they both identified comparing perspectives, summarized events, and understanding the narrators and characters’ primary goals. The confirmation of standards was shared by AI for 3R2 and 3R6, and not 3R3. One difference was AI sharing the challenges for multilingual learning, which is the dual load of cultural schema and contrastive vocabulary. MLs require extensive support to bridge the vocabulary gap when making connections to their own lives into formal English academic writing and discussion. Recommendations for scaffolds aligned with support: I include sentence frames and visuals, but AI uses the keyword “culturally responsive scaffolding”. AI expanded my thinking about language support for ENLs and MLs; however, Specific directions and files to understand the unit I will be using were required in the search to get the best outcomes using AI as an analytical partner.
Peer responses.
#1 Hi J.,
You shared a great comparison on your critique versus AI critique. You mentioned AI gives you a better depth into the Unit and is not oversimplified as your summary. I agree that using AI to deepen our knowledge and expand on what we offer to students can be helpful in teaching and preparing them with a wide scope of content areas. When students are given more information that is appropriate to their Grade level and proficiency, they can grasp sufficient information to bring understanding of the object, which is a positive influence on the best outcomes for all students.
Thanks, Shobha
#2 Hi T.,
You shared some great information on identifying curriculum design and instructional design. These two go hand in hand and significantly increase participation and productivity of students’ outcomes. You also shared great instructional methods to encourage student outcomes by providing opportunities for scaffolding, which is an important component for multilingual learners. Emphasizing culturally responsive teaching is essential for English Language Learners, which helps them to connect using background knowledge and make meaningful connections. A key point in your analysis and AI that I thought is imperative is the inclusion of family relationships; this is a big part of students’ outcomes and creates a sense of belonging and motivation to learn in an environment that values community.
Thanks, Shobha
#3 Hi M.,
“Curriculum design tells teachers what and when to teach a topic. Instructional design allows teachers to create lessons, supplement the curriculum, and deliver instruction.” These two sentences stand out to me and hit exactly the difference between these two topics and how they go hand in hand with each other. I watched a video shared by our professor on the 4 Ts of Curriculum Design framework, which includes Topic, Task, Target, and Text (EL Education, 2018). These are 4 simple concepts for how to design a curriculum and build knowledge for students. This framework works in an interrelationship, helping teachers connect and create the scaffolding. To simplify it, the curriculum offers the ingredients to a standard, and teachers use those ingredients based on individual outcomes in proportion to students’ expectations.
Thanks, Shobha
Reference:
EL Education. (2018). Curriculum Design: The 4 Ts. Touro University. YouTube Video.
I believe that highlighting an exemplary discussion board post does more than celebrate one candidate’s success; it sets a visible, attainable standard that shows the whole course cohort what thoughtful, well-developed thinking looks like in practice. When I feature one of my candidates’ work on my blog, I want them to feel that the often invisible labor of reflection, synthesis, and pedagogical reasoning behind a strong post has truly been seen. I also believe that celebrating progress, not just polished perfection, builds a culture where candidates learn from and encourage one another rather than viewing the discussion board as a box to check. Ultimately, I share this work because I want my future educators to know their voices matter, modeling the same encouraging, growth-oriented feedback I hope they will one day offer their own students.Beyond the present cohort, my blog also serves as a living repository, offering future students clear and exemplary models to draw inspiration from as they develop their own voices.
Ishrat Jahan: I earned my Bachelor of Science in Childhood Education with a bilingual extension in Bangla. I currently 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.
“My journey at Touro has helped me better understand the importance of supporting multilingual learners through meaningful, equitable, and culturally responsive instruction.”
Ishrat Jahan, Touro University TESOL Candidate
EDDN 637 Module 1
Discussion Board Post
1. What are some characteristics of ELL’s to consider to implement effective teaching?
There are many characteristics of ELLs to consider when implementing effective teaching. First, teachers need to understand that all ELLs are not the same, so they should not be taught in the exact same way because ELLs come to the classroom with different English proficiency levels, first languages, family situations, schooling experiences, interrupted schooling, cultural backgrounds, literacy skills in their home language, and academic strengths. The SIOP chapter clearly states that “all English learners in schools are not alike” (Echevarria et al., 2017). This means that students should receive support based on their individual needs. For example, if a student attended school in a different country and is literate in their first language, they may not need the same support as a student who has had no previous schooling, interrupted schooling, or limited literacy experiences.
In my view, effective teaching starts with knowing the whole student, not just their English level, because every student comes to the classroom with some knowledge. If the teacher already knows the student’s background, they can build from there. For example, if a student already understands a concept in their home language, the teacher can use that existing knowledge to build further understanding instead of reteaching everything from the beginning. This connects to the idea that “when teachers know students’ backgrounds and native-language abilities, they can choose better materials and instructional strategies” (Echevarria et al., 2017). This means that teachers need to understand students as a whole, including their language, culture, and learning history, to make content accessible and effective.
2. On Teaching Fairness: Considering the concept of fairness in education, how can TESOL educators ensure equitable classroom practices for multilingual learners? Provide specific examples from the P–3 Multilingual Learning Toolkit to support your response.
Fairness in education does not mean giving every student the exact same thing. To me, fairness means giving students the specific supports they need to succeed by providing opportunities to access learning and show what they know. This is very important for multilingual learners because it values their home language, culture, and prior knowledge instead of viewing them as barriers. The P-3 Multilingual Learning Toolkit explains that learning and using key words in a child’s home language “shows respect and interest” and helps children feel valued (New Venture Fund, n.d.). A practical example would be labeling classroom objects in English and students’ home languages, inviting students to teach the class or their partner a word from their home language, or previewing important vocabulary in both languages when possible. In addition, teachers can create equitable classroom practices by using different approaches to support and assess students fairly. The Toolkit explains that multilingual learners’ language and content skills may be “distributed across English and the home language” (New Venture Fund, n.d.). This means that a student may understand a concept, but they may not yet be able to fully explain their thinking in English. If they are unable to explain their ideas in English, that does not mean they are not strong students. It means they need different support. Teachers can use different approaches to help students demonstrate their understanding through oral responses, pointing, drawings, partner discussions, group discussions, sentence starters, and home-language support when needed. The Toolkit also states that assessment should be “linguistically, culturally, and developmentally appropriate” (New Venture Fund, n.d.) because fairness should measure what students already know, not only how much English they can produce at that moment.
3. SIOP and Structured Literacy Introduction and Practical Application: Reflect on your initial understanding of the SIOP model. How does the approach outlined in the SIOP at a Glance Practical Guide enhance both content and language instruction? Identify one SIOP component and one structured literacy approach from the structured literacy map you believe is particularly impactful for multilingual learners and justify your choice with a practical example.
My initial understanding of the SIOP model is that it helps teachers plan lessons so multilingual learners can understand both the content and the language needed to succeed. After reviewing the SIOP at a Glance Practical Guide, I realized that creating a SIOP lesson is not just about simplifying a lesson. Instead, it is about making instruction explicit, intentional, clear, and accessible for everyone. The guide shows that an effective lesson should include clear content and language objectives, vocabulary support, comprehensible input, background knowledge, interaction, practice, and assessment. This approach supports content instruction because students are not just being given information; they are being supported step by step through hands-on activities, visuals, modeling, and connections to their experiences. It also supports language learning by giving students opportunities to speak, listen, read, and write with clear vocabulary and sentence practice in meaningful ways.
One SIOP component I find important is building background because it connects students’ culture, first language, and existing knowledge to new learning. For example, before teaching a lesson about culture, I could ask students to talk about their culture, teach key vocabulary, show pictures, bring in items, and connect the English words to words they may know in their first language. This helps students feel confident and comfortable before learning new content. One structured literacy approach I think is important is explicit and systematic vocabulary instruction because when teachers preteach and directly teach important words, it benefits multilingual learners instead of assuming they will understand the words from the context. For example, if students are learning about culture, I would introduce key words like food, belief, and tradition using vocabulary cards, anchor charts, student-friendly definitions, pictures, examples, sentence starters, and gestures before asking students to read and write. Before asking them to complete the work, I would explicitly model using sentence starters such as “In my culture, I celebrate_____ becaue_____,” and “A special food from my culture is______”. After that, students could share more about their culture by creating their own sentence with the whole class or with a partner. This makes the lesson clear, meaningful, and supportive for multilingual learners because students are learning grammar, vocabulary, speaking, and writing in an organized way.
4. Supports for Multilingual Learners: Based on your review of the SUPPORTS FOR MULTILINGUAL LEARNERS document and the structured literacy map, discuss two specific strategies or resources you could incorporate into a SIOP lesson plan to strengthen language acquisition for multilingual learners. How would these strategies directly support student literacy, engagement, and academic success?
Based on my review of the Supports for Multilingual Learners document and the structured literacy map, two specific strategies or resources I could incorporate into a SIOP lesson plan to strengthen language acquisition for multilingual learners are differentiated language supports and intentional vocabulary resources that connect language with grade-level content. The Supports for Multilingual Learners document explains that multilingual learners and English learners have different proficiency levels and educational backgrounds, so teachers should avoid a “one-size-fits-all approach” (Mavrogordato et al., 2024). In a SIOP lesson, this could mean using visuals, partner discussions, sentence starters, and small-group instruction based on students’ needs. Another strategy is using instructional resources that build English while still giving students access to grade-level content. The Supports for Multilingual Learners document states that “translations, eBooks, intentional vocabulary development, and the use of definitions and cognates” can support language development and help multilingual learners and English learners access lessons (Mavrogordato et al., 2024). This means that using instructional resources, teachers can still teach the same content while using different supports. For example, in an ELA lesson on tradition, I could pre-teach key vocabulary with interactive cards, pictures, and gestures, include cognates when possible, and let students practice the words through speaking, reading, and writing.
These strategies directly support student literacy, engagement, and academic success because students are learning in meaningful ways that include comprehension, vocabulary, and academic language in context. They also increase engagement and provide opportunities for students to engage in learning without feeling lost or shy. Most importantly, they support academic success by helping multilingual learners access the same meaningful content as their classmates while still developing English.
References
Echevarría, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. J. (2017). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model (5th ed.). Pearson.
Kim, S. (n.d.). SIOP at a glance: A practical guide for beginners. Touro University Graduate School of Education.
Mavrogordato, M., Bartlett, C., Callahan, R., DeMatthews, D., & Izquierdo, E. (2024). Supports for multilingual students who are classified as English learners. EdResearch for Action. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED656680.pdf
In Teaching Scenarios, Chapter 2 p. 43 on, pay attention to the lessons of Mr. Cullen, Mr. Ryan, and Ms. Sauerbraun on each of the Lesson Preparation features. What did you learn? How did reading the lesson scenarios give you insight into the SIOP model? Did you notice any Science of Reading (SoR) or structured literacy approaches? You must quote directly from the textbook to support your statements.
After reading Chapter 2 teaching scenarios, I learned that lesson preparation is very important in the SIOP model because it supports students’ success. Another way to say this is that lesson preparation affects how clearly students understand both the content and the language of the lesson. If lesson preparation is strong, it increases the chances of student success. Echevarria et al. (2017) state that “lesson planning is critical to both a student’s and a teacher’s success” (p.28). This means that lesson planning affects not only students but also teachers because it serves as a roadmap for effective teaching. It helps make learning meaningful and organized, and it shows that SIOP is not just a checklist. I understand that lesson preparation helps ensure English learners can access grade-level content through necessary components such as clear objectives, vocabulary support, scaffolds, and meaningful activities. Another important thing I learned is that teachers should have high expectations for English learners because students come to the classroom with background knowledge. Teachers should provide the right tools and support so students can still work with grade-level content regardless of their English proficiency. Echevarria et al. (2017) state that teachers should not use “watered-down curricula” because this can create a learning gap between English learners and native English speakers (p. 29). This means teachers should not lower their expectations or remove the main content for English learners. Instead, they should provide the right support and adapt the lesson based on students’ needs. For example, teachers can give students visuals, vocabulary support, and scaffolded outlines, just like Ms. Chen did in her lesson for her English learners. Instead of changing or removing the main content, she adapted the lesson based on students’ needs, and English learners were still learning about the same content as the rest of the class.
The lesson scenarios from all three teachers gave me a clearer picture of what strong SIOP instruction looks like in practice. The lessons showed how clear, explicit, and meaningful activities can make instruction more effective. For example, when I looked at Ms. Chen’s lesson, I found it to be a strong SIOP lesson because her lesson was explicit, clearly displayed both content and language objectives, used picture books, outlines, maps, and a jump-start mini lesson to support her English learners. Her lesson preparation was careful and purposeful, which helped her instruction and helped her students understand what they were learning. This showed me that effective preparation helps students know what they are learning and how they will use language to show understanding. Echevarria et al. (2017) explain that “content objectives need to be written in terms of what students will learn or do; they should be stated simply, orally and in writing” (p. 31). This stood out to me because lessons should be student-centered. Students, especially multilingual learners, need to understand the purpose of the lesson and what they will do or learn before they can fully participate.
Besides that, I also noticed several Science of Reading and structured literacy connections in Chapter 2. I noticed the use of outlines, graphic organizers, sentence starters, adapted texts, and audio-supported text. In structured literacy, there are many important areas to consider, such as explicit vocabulary instruction, morphemes, semantics, and clarifying context. One example I noticed was explicit vocabulary instruction, which connects to structured literacy because students need direct and systematic instruction in vocabulary and language structures. Echevarria et al. (2017) explain that language objectives may focus on “students’ vocabulary, new words and concepts, or teaching word structure” (p. 36). This connects to structured literacy because it helps students organize information, understand vocabulary, and build reading comprehension.
Overall, the lesson scenarios helped me see that the SIOP model becomes effective when teachers plan intentionally, consider students’ needs, and support them with the right tools so English learners can meet the lesson goal, and help them learn the same content as their native English- language peers without removing the main content. After reading Chapter 2, I learned that a strong lesson includes clear content and language objectives, differentiated support, meaningful activities, and opportunities for students to listen, speak, read, and write. As the chapter summary states, SIOP teachers should “teach the academic language of their subject explicitly and use different techniques to make new information accessible to English learners” (Echevarria et al., 2017, p. 68). This gave me a better understanding that the SIOP model works best when teachers support both content learning and language development at the same time with correct support.
a. After looking at this infographic, connect the infographic with your reading in this module – how would you connect Lesson preparation with the Science of Reading and structured literacy?
After looking at the Science of Reading infographic, I noticed a strong connection between SIOP lesson preparation, the Big 6, and structured literacy. When I looked at the infographic, I noticed several important areas of literacy development, including phonics, vocabulary, phonological awareness, oral language, fluency, and comprehension. The infographic states that oral language is the foundation because “speaking and listening “ are the bases of literacy (Cowin, n.d.). This connects to lesson preparation because it allows teachers to create opportunities for all students, including multilingual learners, to listen, speak, read, and write while also learning grade-level content. It also allows teachers to intentionally connect literacy, language objectives, and content before instruction begins because strong lesson preparation requires teachers to plan ahead of time. Echevarria et al. (2017) explain that “lesson planning is critical to both a student’s and a teacher’s success” (p. 28). This means lesson preparation is important for both students’ and teachers’ success because it supports clear instruction. This connects to structured literacy because, according to the structured literacy infographic, instruction should be explicit, systematic, and scaffolded (International Dyslexia Association, 2025). I also noticed that SIOP lesson preparation supports the Science of Reading because it includes background knowledge, comprehension, vocabulary development, and oral language. From the readings, I understand that multilingual learners need rich, grade-level content paired with clear communication, not watered-down lessons. Teachers must provide clear and accessible explanations while keeping academic materials challenging for language learners without lowering academic standards. This connects to Chapter 2’s idea that teachers should not use “watered-down curricula,” but should instead provide scaffolds so English learners can still access grade-level content (Echevarria et al., 2017, p. 29). This idea also reflects on the lesson plan because, in a lesson plan, it might mean using visuals, modeling sentence starters, pre-teaching vocabulary, adapting text, and providing opportunities for students to listen, speak, read, and write.
The structured literacy infographic also connects strongly to lesson preparation because it describes effective instruction as explicit, sequential, multimodal, systematic, and scaffolded (International Dyslexia Association, 2025). This idea connects with the SIOP lesson preparation model because teachers must plan language and content objectives, vocabulary, assessments, meaningful activities, scaffolds, and adapted instruction for different proficiency levels. For example, if I am teaching a lesson about feelings, I would plan a content objective such as, “Students will identify a character’s feeling,” and a language objective such as, “Students will describe a character’s feeling using sentence starters, such as, ‘The character is feeling _________.’” This supports multilingual learners because they are learning both ELA content and the academic language and vocabulary needed to explain their thinking. From the infographic and SIOP lesson model, I learned that teachers should not assume students already know academic language or literacy skills on their own. Instead, teachers need to directly teach and model these skills for students. Symons (2016) explains that multilingual learners bring important strengths to the classroom and that “linguistic diversity is an asset” (p. 14 ). She also explains that teachers should “create opportunities for students to use oral language, to hear language, to read language, and to write for authentic, academic purposes” (Symons, 2016, p.15). This connects to lesson preparation and the Science of Reading because teachers need to plan lessons while keeping students’ cultures, home languages, and background knowledge in mind, while oral language, vocabulary, and comprehension are all important parts of literacy development. Kramer et al. (2010) also explain the importance of clear language objectives. Their reading helped me understand that SIOP lessons should include academic language functions, not just vocabulary, because language objectives help teachers focus on what students need to do with language. In a SIOP lesson plan, teachers should not only write content objectives, but also language objectives to help students practice vocabulary, sentence structure, oral language, and comprehension in an explicit and organized way.
Overall, I would connect lesson preparation with the Science of Reading and structured literacy by saying that strong lesson planning makes literacy instruction meaningful and purposeful for students. Each of these plays an important role in effective instruction because SIOP lesson preparation helps teachers plan how multilingual learners can access both content and language. Structured literacy explains how instruction should be delivered, and the Science of Reading informs teachers about what students need for literacy development.
b. Find one article/website on SoR and share it in your DSB with a link, and in 3 sentences, share what you learned or questions you have.
One helpful website I found is Reading Rockets: Science of Reading: https://www.readingrockets.org/classroom/evidence-based-instruction/science-reading.Reading Rockets explains that the Science of Readingis grounded in research and evidence from multiple fields, including quantitative and qualitative studies, education, linguistics, and psychology. It gives important insight into effective classroom practices. One important thing I learned is that the Science of Reading is not based on only one study, but on multiple research studies about how students learn to read, write, and spell (Reading Rockets, n.d.). Although children learn to talk naturally, reading needs to be taught. I also learned that SoR does not only focus on phonics; it also includes fluency, comprehension, vocabulary, and oral language, which strongly connect to multilingual learners. In addition to explicit literacy instruction, multilingual learners also need to build academic language and background knowledge. However, one question I still have is: in a busy classroom, what is the best way for teachers to incorporate fluency, vocabulary, oral language, comprehension, and meaningful content-based discussions in a single lesson every day? How can teachers balance phonics and decoding instruction with enough time for all these areas to work together in the classroom?
References
Cowin, J. (n.d). Science of reading: Big 6 + instructional framework: Foundations, instruction, and equity in literacy development [Infographic].
Echevarría, J., Vogt, M. E., & Short, D. J. (2017). Making content comprehensible for English learners: The SIOP model (5th ed.). Pearson.
This course provides a historical overview of second language acquisition theories and teaching methods. Students learn how to apply current approaches, methods and techniques, with attention to the effective use of materials, in teaching English as a second language. Students will engage in the planning and implementation of standards-based ESL instruction which includes differentiated learning experiences geared to students’ needs. Emphasis is placed on creating culturally responsive learning environments. Includes 15 hours of field work.
Marissa Diveris is a high school social studies ENL teacher with four years of teaching experience. She earned her undergraduate degree in History Secondary Education from St. Joseph’s University and is completing her master’s degree in TESOL at Touro University. Her professional interests include multilingual learner advocacy, culturally responsive teaching, and making rigorous social studies content accessible through intentional language supports and scaffolding.
This fieldwork project focused on observing and analyzing instructional practices used to support English Language Learners (ELLs) across a variety of classroom settings. The observations took place in a suburban high school setting with diverse English learners across grade levels. Observations were conducted in four classrooms, including ENL and integrated co-teaching environments in social studies, mathematics, and science. In addition, interviews were conducted with two teachers and two English learners to gain insight into both instructional approaches and student experiences. The purpose of this fieldwork was to examine how educators adapt instruction to meet the linguistic and academic needs of diverse learners, while also promoting engagement and language development. Through the combination of classroom observations and interviews, several key themes emerged, including the use of scaffolding, the role of academic language, the importance of student interaction, and the need to balance support with increasing independence. These findings provide valuable insight into effective practices for supporting English learners and have important implications for my own teaching as an ENL social studies educator. This analysis will examine how these themes emerged across both instructional practices and student experiences.
“My journey through the TESOL program at Touro strengthened both my instructional practices and my understanding of multilingual learners as assets within the classroom. The program challenged me to think more critically about equity, language development, and the importance of creating rigorous but accessible learning experiences for all students.”
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.
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.
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.
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.
Jonida Lepuroshi is a Special Education teacher for students in grades K–2 and currently works in an elementary school in Manhattan, New York. She is pursuing an Advanced Certificate in TESOL at Touro University, where she focuses on supporting multilingual learners and ensuring they have access to curriculum materials without language barriers. Her goal is to create an inclusive and culturally responsive learning environment that supports both academic and language development for all students.
Jonida Lepuroshi: In Course EDPN 673, I learned about historical and current second language acquisition theories and how to apply different instructional methods to support English Language Learners and multilingual learners. The course emphasized planning standards-based, differentiated instruction and creating culturally responsive classrooms. I also gained practical and effective strategies for curriculum development, selecting appropriate materials, and designing assessments that support both language growth and academic achievement
My Touro journey has deepened my understanding of culturally responsive teaching and strengthened my commitment to supporting multilingual learners through accessible and meaningful instruction.”
Jonida Lepuroshi, Touro University TESOL Candidate
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.
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 learningand 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
The EDDN 637 Discussion Board on Practice and Application with a Focus on Differentiated Assessment 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 is also a low-stakes grade preparation for a larger assignment later in the semester and serves as a knowledge check for me, the faculty. The answers my candidates provide are helpful for my commentary focused on the upcoming assignment. 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.
Dionysia Di Meo is an experienced educator and NYS‑licensed bilingual (Greek) Speech‑Language Pathologist specializing in pediatric language/phonological disorders, dysphagia, and Autism Spectrum Disorders. She has extensive experience in Early Intervention, holds TSSLD certification, and is pursuing an Advanced Certificate in TESOL at Touro University. An aspiring polyglot, she is learning Italian, Spanish, and Turkish, and teaches Greek Language, History, and Culture at a National Blue Ribbon School.
Through Touro’s TESOL program, I learned that the most powerful classrooms are built on scaffolds, not shortcuts – meeting Multilingual Learners where they are and believing in where they can go.
Dionysia Di Meo, Touro University TESOL Candidate
Featuring my teacher candidates’ work in my TESOL blog is an intentional pedagogical practice that recognizes them as emerging professionals whose ideas, reflections, and instructional designs deserve visibility within the field. It makes the complex process of becoming a TESOL educator visible by showcasing how candidates connect coursework, theory, fieldwork, and multilingual learner advocacy in authentic classroom contexts. Most importantly, it positions my candidates not simply as students completing assignments, but as capable, praxis-oriented future educators whose developing expertise, creativity, and professional voices contribute meaningfully to the broader educational community. Below is the exemplary DB submitted by my candidate Dionysia Di Meo:
