Information load Personal response: Potential for reading process instruction: (skills & strategies) You may report this assignment in a narrative or a table: Genre Dev. Level Quality Level analysis Personal Response Instructional potential ED 678 Reading and Literature Book Analysis Assignment Rubric Potential Points Unnacceptable Acceptable Target Genres Picture book fantasy/science fiction; Realistic fiction Historical fiction Nonfiction/ Informtn Multicultral or hum iss 4 Less than five genres are identified and correctly represented. At least five genres as designated are represented. Selects one book from each designated genre and clearly identifies as such. Dev. 4 Developmental levels are generally represented Books represent developmental levels as outlined Books clearly represent distinctly different developmental levels Quality 5 Some books are of high quality and/or analysis is vague, general or incomplete. are of high quality and analysis thorough as outlined in assignment. Analysis reflects high quality of books with clear examples quoted for justification. analysis 4 Level analysis is vague or incomplete. Includes all elements mentioned correctly in level analysis. Clearly and specifically provides rationale for all level elements. Personal Response 5 Response is included but lacks detail or depth. Response gives complete description of reactions with logical justification from book. Response is explicit, and concise, with specific examples given from book. Instructional potential 2 Demonstrates some reading of text Application demonstrates understanding of genre and response pedagogy from textbooks. Instructional ideas reflect comprehensive reading of text and accurate and creative application. Communication 1 Ideas are organized, with some clarity. Ideas are well organized and Ideas are well organized, expressed clearly,
Timely discussion contributions 1 Less than 2 postings somewhat distributed or not distributed throughout the week. 2-3 postings distributed throughout the week. 3-4 postings well distributed throughout the week. Student’s original message 2 The participant consistently had to be prompted or coaxed to participate. The participant usually, but not always, expressed herself or himself clearly. Demonstrates a degree of reflective thought pertaining to personal perspectives. The participant consistently posted insightful comments and questions that prompted on-topic discussion. The participant provides references to relevant literature to support statements. Participant shares resources of interest to others. The participant demonstrates an observable understanding of the issues discussed. Comments demonstrate understanding of ideas and issues gained from the reading assignment. The understanding will be at the critical thinking and synthesis level. The quality of writing reflects that of a professional educator. Student’s responses to others 1 The participant was rude or abusive to other course participants. Participant responds to other group members in such a way to continue the discussion of the topic. Response continues the topic by going into more depth. The participant consistently helped clarify or synthesize other group members’ ideas. Response goes into explanation to substantiate or elaborate on the message to which it is responding. Contribution to discussion helps others to understand the topic more through varied perspectives or associations. Student’s contribution to the flow of the discussion 1 The participant frequently attempted (success is irrelevant) to draw the discussion off-topic, even if the participant’s participation otherwise conforms to a higher level on the rubric. Participant responds to group members in such a way to continue the discussion of the topic. Participant connected ideas expressed among other group members and helped keep the discussion on track. University of Alaska Southeast Reading Specialist Program 2011 SCHEDULE H=Hancock textbook #=chapter Month Date Topic Reading Due Assignment Due January 12 Go over syllabus / goals Literature overview— Literary Response: Making meaning discuss (high T guide: characterization, tone, style, ) by Weisel Journal 19 Reader response Reader response: Oral response Book discussion Bat 6 (Intermed. T intrusion) Bat 6 by Wolff H: #1, #2, #9 Journal
26 Read Aloud—--Whitewash Reader response:Written response Book Discussion Milkweed (Low T Intervention) H: #10 Milkweed by Spinelli Journal February 2 Character & Plot Character interaction & debrief Choice book #1 Journal 9 Theme & Setting Realistic Fiction H: #6 Choice book #2 Journal 16 Multicultural Literature Critical Literacy Perspective Taking Choice book #3 H: #8 Journal 23 Picture Books Artistic Response Reader response: Art & H: #3, #12 Ruddell #33 Dickinson, Learning through the Arts 2 Developmental Levels Matching to readers Ruddell #38, #31 In depth thematic book response 9 Spring Vacation—No No readings 16 Teaching Considerations Breadth vs. depth— Critical & Creative Thinking Literacy discussions/ Book Clubs Ruddell #35, #36 23 Biography & Information Literature Reader response: Nonfiction H: #7, #13 Ruddell #26 Book selection 30 Literature as Model for Writing Poetry H: #5, #11 Literature Discussion Plan April 6 Interdisciplinary & Intertextual Connections H: #14 Book analysis 13 Assessment H: #15 20 Literacy and Technology For student For teacher Poetry on the Screen (in Resources) Lawrence, McNeal & Yildiz, Summer … (in Resources) Self-reflection and