Elementary Teacher Preparation in Reading
Instruction: Minnesota
Delivering Well Prepared Teachers Policy
Analysis of Minnesota's policies
Minnesota requires that all new elementary teachers pass the Minnesota Teacher Licensure Examination (MTLE) elementary education content test, which includes the equivalent of a stand alone science of reading assessment.
In its standards for elementary and special education teacher preparation, Minnesota also requires teacher preparation programs to address the science of reading.
Elementary teacher candidates must be prepared for the key instructional shifts related to literacy that differentiate college- and
career-readiness standards from their predecessors.The
testing standards for the reading subtest of the MTLE incorporate the instructional
shifts in the use of text associated with college- and career-readiness
standards for students and require the following:
- Must be able to demonstrate knowledge of various types of informational/expository texts, including key textual features (e.g., indexes and headings), graphic features (e.g., charts and diagrams) and organizational structures (e.g., descriptive, chronological, cause/effect, comparison/contrast, problem/solution) of these texts and applying knowledge of explicit instruction in key features and organizational structures of various print and digital informational/expository texts to promote students' understanding of these texts
- Must be able to apply knowledge of explicit instruction in analysis and response skills for informational/expository texts (e.g., analyzing an author's point of view or argument, evaluating a text with respect to credibility, analyzing a text's internal consistency or logic, paraphrasing information from a text, summarizing a text's main ideas)
- Must be able to demonstrate knowledge of formal and informal methods for assessing students' understanding and analysis of and response to literary/narrative and informational/expository texts and to demonstrate the ability to interpret and use the results of these assessments to plan effective instruction in literary response and analysis and content-area literacy skills.
- Demonstrate knowledge of sources of information used in social studies and their ethical use (e.g., primary sources, Internet, copyright, source citations)
- Recognize stages in the inquiry process (e.g., developing the essential question; forming a hypothesis; finding, collecting and organizing historical research)
- Apply knowledge of the use of tools of inquiry and problem solving (e.g., graphs, maps, time lines).
Recommendations for Minnesota
Ensure that the science of reading test is meaningful.
To ensure that its science of reading test is meaningful, Minnesota should
evaluate its passing score to make certain it reflects a high standard of
performance.
Ensure that new elementary teachers are prepared to incorporate informational text of increasing complexity into classroom instruction.
Minnesota's
testing frameworks are commendable. The state is encouraged to
strengthen its existing policy and explicitly require that teachers
possess the ability to adequately incorporate complex informational text
into classroom instruction.
Ensure that new elementary teachers are prepared to incorporate literacy skills as an integral part of every subject.
To ensure that elementary students are capable of accessing varied
information about the world around them, Minnesota should also—either
through testing frameworks or teacher standards—include literacy skills
and using text to build content knowledge in history/social studies,
science, technical subjects and the arts.
State response to our analysis
Minnesota recognized the factual accuracy of this analysis.
-
Minnesota
Select another topic
Delivering Well Prepared Teachers
- Admission into Teacher Preparation
- Elementary Teacher Preparation
- Elementary Teacher Preparation in Reading Instruction
- Elementary Teacher Preparation in Mathematics
- Early Childhood
- Middle School Teacher Preparation
- Secondary Teacher Preparation
- Secondary Teacher Preparation in Science and Social Studies
- Special Education Teacher Preparation
- Special Education Preparation in Reading
- Assessing Professional Knowledge
- Student Teaching
- Teacher Preparation Program Accountability
Expanding the Pool of Teachers
Identifying Effective Teachers
- State Data Systems
- Evaluation of Effectiveness
- Frequency of Evaluations
- Tenure
- Licensure Advancement
- Equitable Distribution
Retaining Effective Teachers
Exiting Ineffective Teachers
Pensions
Research rationale
Reading science has
identified five components of effective instruction.
Teaching children to read is the most important task
teachers undertake. Over the past 60 years, scientists from many fields have
worked to determine how people learn to read and why some struggle. This science
of reading has led to breakthroughs that can dramatically reduce the number of
children destined to become functionally illiterate or barely literate adults.
By routinely applying in the classroom the lessons learned from the scientific
findings, most reading failure can be avoided. Estimates indicate that the
current failure rate of 20 to 30 percent could be reduced to 2 to 10 percent.
Scientific research has shown that there are five essential
components of effective reading instruction: explicit and systematic
instruction in phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary and
comprehension. Many states' policies still do not reflect the strong research
consensus in reading instruction that has emerged over the last few decades.
Many teacher preparation programs resist
teaching scientifically based reading instruction. NCTQ's reports on teacher
preparation, beginning with What
Education Schools Aren't Teaching about Reading and What Elementary Teachers
Aren't Learning in 2006 and continuing through the Teacher Prep Review in 2013 and 2014, have consistently found the
overwhelming majority of teacher preparation programs across the country do not
train teachers in the science of reading. Whether through standards or coursework
requirements, states must direct programs to provide this critical training. But relying on programs alone is insufficient; states must only grant a license to new elementary teachers who can demonstrate they have the knowledge and skills to teach children to read.
Most current reading
tests do not offer assurance that teachers know the science of reading.
A growing number of states, such as Massachusetts,
Connecticut and Virginia, require strong, stand-alone assessments entirely
focused on the science of reading. Other states rely on either pedagogy tests
or content tests that include items on reading instruction. However, since
reading instruction is addressed only in one small part of most of these tests,
it is often not necessary to know the science of reading to pass. States need
to make sure that a teacher candidate cannot pass a test that purportedly
covers reading instruction without knowing the critical material.
College- and career-readiness standards require significant shifts in literacy instruction.
College- and career-readiness standards for K-12 students adopted by nearly all states require from a teachers a different focus on literacy integrated into all subject areas. The standards demand that teachers are prepared to bring complex text and academic language into regular use, emphasize the use of evidence from informational and literary texts and build knowledge and vocabulary through content-rich text. While most states have not ignored teachers' need for training and professional development related to these instructional shifts, few states have attended to the parallel need to align teacher competencies and requirements for teacher preparation so that new teachers will enter the classroom ready to help students meet the expectations of these standards.
Elementary Teacher Preparation in Reading Instruction: Supporting Research
For
evidence on what new teachers are not learning about reading instruction, see NCTQ,
"What Education Schools Aren't Teaching About Reading and What Elementary
Teachers Aren't Learning" 2006) at:http://www.nctq.org/nctq/images/nctq_reading_study_app.pdf.
For
problems with existing reading tests, see S. Stotsky, "Why American Students Do Not Learn to Read Very Well: The Unintended Consequences of Title II and Teacher Testing," Third Education Group Review, Vol. 2, No. 2, 2006; and
D. W. Rigden, Report on Licensure Alignment with the Essential Components of Effective Reading Instruction (Washington, D.C.: Reading First Teacher
Education Network, 2006).
For
information on where states set passing scores on elementary level content
tests for teacher licensing across the U.S., see chart on p. 13 of NCTQ "Recommendations for the Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Removing the Roadblocks: How Federal Policy Can Cultivate Effective Teachers," (2011).
For an extensive summary of the research base supporting the instructional shifts associated with college- and career-readiness standards, see "Research Supporting the Common Core ELA Literacy Shifts and Standards" available from Student Achievement Partners.