Content+Area+Reading+-+REA+3315+–+Online

Syllabus REA 3315 - Content Area Reading Alicia Massingill || Course: Content Area Reading online course || office # 817 461-8741, Ext. 132 Office Hours: Upon Request e-mail: **amassingill@abconline.org** || The mission of Arlington Baptist College is to prepare men and women for Christian life and ministries, both lay and professional, through studies in Bible, general education, church vocations, and practical service, integrating faith and learning in the context of a Christian worldview. The focus of this course is reading to learn. Students will learn how to maximize critical thinking by incorporating the language arts in content area reading instruction. Particular emphasis is placed on the application of strategies for text comprehension. The student will also learn methods to evaluate text, match text to reader, and assess comprehension. Special attention is given to developing and refining the skills needed to provide instructional strategies for teaching reading as described in Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS). Textbook Allan, K.K., & Miller, M.S. (2005) //Literacy learning in the content areas: Strategies for middle and secondary school teachers.// 2nd ed. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin. ISBN-13: 978-0-618-33277-9 As instructor, I will: The student will: For satisfactory completion of the course, each student will: identify reading strategies for at-risk learners. Lesson Quiz || 8 @ 25 points each || 200 || Graphic Organizer (lesson 1) || 10 points || 10 || PReP Strategy Essay (lesson 2) || 10 points || 10 || Questioning Activity (Lesson 3) || 10 points || 10 || Game Design (Lesson 4) || 30 points || 30 || Ordeal by Cheque(Lesson 5) || 10 points || 10 || Vocabulary List (Lesson 6) || 10 points || 10 || Cubing Activity (Lesson 7) || 10 points || 10 || Sum it Up (Lesson 8) || 10 points || 10 || Discussion Board Posts || 5 @ 10 points each || 50 || Final Exam || 150 ||   150  ||    ||  ** 500 **   || Bibliography Allington, R. L. (2002). You can’t learn much from books you can’t read. //Educational Leadership//, 16-19. Bakken, J. P. & Whedon, C. K. (2002). Teaching text structure to improve reading comprehension. //Intervention in School and Clinic, 37//(4), 229-233. Barton, M. L., Heidema, C., & Jordan, D. (2002). Teaching in mathematics. //Educational// //Leadership//, 24-28. Beck, I. L., & McKeown, M. G. (2002). Questioning the author: Making sense of social studies. //Educational Leadership//, 44-47. Brabham, E.G., & Villaume, S. K. (2002). Leveled text: The good news and the bad news. //The Reading Teacher, 55//(5), 438-441 Brown, K.J. (2000). What kind of text-for whom and when? Textual scaffolding for beginning readers. //The Reading Teacher, 53//, 292-307. Burke, J. (2002). The internet reader. //Educational Leadership//, 38-42. Burns, P., Roe, B., & Smith, S. (2002). //Teaching reading in today’s elementary schools//, 8th ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Company. D’Arcangelo, M. (2002). The challenge of content-area reading: A conversation with Donna Ogle. //Educational Leadership//. 12-15. Guillaume, A. M. (1998). Learning with text in the primary grades. //The Reading Teacher, 51//(6), 476-486. Hoyt, L. (1999). //Revisit, reflect, retell: Strategies for improving reading comprehension//. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Press. Pinnell, G. S., & Fountas, I. (1996). //Guided Reading//. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Pinnell, G. S., & Fountas, I. (1998). //Word Matters//. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Richardson, J., & Morgan, R. (2003). //Reading to learn in the content areas//, 5th ed. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomason Learning. ||  ||
 * Professor: ** ||
 * Professor: ** ||
 * Class Information: ** ||
 * Class Information: ** ||
 * Contact Information: ** ||
 * Contact Information: ** ||
 * College Mission Statement **
 * Course Description **
 * Course ** Goals
 * explore the difficulties inherent in content area reading instruction.
 * introduce an instructional framework for teaching reading in the content area.
 * demonstrate strategies to increase comprehension in the content areas.
 * explore current research in the field of content area reading.
 * suggest methods to assess textbooks and evaluate student comprehension.
 * introduce current instruments used to assess reading skills.
 * Instructional Goals **
 * differentiate between learning to read and reading to learn.
 * appreciate the importance of expository text in education.
 * understand the importance of student engagement in order to achieve comprehension.
 * become familiar with the BDA instructional framework.
 * explore ways to implement BDA in the content areas.
 * compare methods of assessing text readability and student comprehension.
 * Learning Objectives **
 * list steps in the BDA lesson framework
 * incorporate affective strategies into the content-area curriculum
 * complement content area instruction with multiple resources including literature and technology.
 * identify activities that can support the match between reader and text.
 * adapt text for special-need students.
 * identify text features and structures that facilitate comprehension.
 * identify strategies and activities for teaching vocabulary.
 * discuss the connection between reading and writing.
 * guide the reader’s ability to use study skills and cooperative study techniques.
 * Evaluation Criteria **
 * Total ** ||
 * Total ** ||
 * Class Work Policies **
 * Attendance
 * Participation is REQUIRED for attendance. Evidence of online activity each week (quiz and/or discussion board posts) serve as evidence of participation.
 * Two absences will result in a **//__10% deduction from final average__//** grade.
 * Three absences will result in **//__course failure__//**.
 * Late Work
 * All work is due by midnight (CST) of the due date posted. Work submitted subsequent to this is deemed “late”.
 * Late work **//__will not be graded__//**.
 * The student assumes responsibility for securing a reliable internet connection. Technology is not fail proof, so **//you are advised NOT to wait until the last hour to post your work.//**. Technological problems will NOT excuse late work
 * Quality
 * All written work is expected to reflect a standard of collegiate quality. Work containing excessive errors in spelling, grammar, or punctuation will be returned for correction prior to grading. In this case, a 50% penalty will apply.