University of Illinois at Chicago College of Education Chicago, Illinois Institution Comment Comments submitted by: Victoria Chou, Dean
Unfortunately NCTQ’s incomplete and not fully disclosed set of rubrics leads to untrustworthy assessments of program design. We offer just one example, related to NCTQ’s two standards related to reading, because the reality in our elementary and special education programs is so at odds with NCTQ’s assessment. NCTQ scored our undergraduate elementary program 0 on the standard related to “elementary reading extent,” despite the fact that we highlighted the thorough coverage of each of the 5 components of effective reading instruction in our syllabi. NCTQ wrote: “Looking at a full range of course materials (i.e., two syllabi and the website?), there is little or no evidence of any instruction on the components of effective reading instruction.” We documented minutes-per-topic-per-class to show how we devoted at least 2 sessions per component, once NCTQ revealed this was one of the criteria. We were then told that one of our textbooks isn’t on NCTQ’s self-selected list of good textbooks and offered no further explanation. Our graduate special education program scored 0 on the standard related to “adherence to effective reading across courses,” despite the fact that the second course that addresses instruction for older readers builds intentionally and explicitly upon the first course for younger readers. NCTQ called the second course, which prioritizes vocabulary and comprehension for students with disabilities, “dead weight.” Contrast the ratings with the institutional track record. In 2001, the National Reading Panel identified five components of effective reading instruction, a scientifically based finding so influential that it now underpins federal and state education policy, our instructional program, and NCTQ’s own basis for its ratings. A UIC faculty member served on the Panel and, moreover, went on to chair the National Literacy Panel for Language Minority Children and Youth, the National Early Literacy Panel, and Chicago Public Schools’ Reading Initiative. Three faculty actively involved in our preparation programs are in the Reading Hall of Fame. UIC faculty and doctoral students helped design and continue to lead CPS’s literacy initiatives, aligning them with the same research and practice taught in our programs. Federal investments in UIC programs are not for research untethered to practice, but for developing and disseminating instructional improvement. We were awarded a five-year $16.4 M USDOE multi-university elementary teacher preparation grant on the strength of our preparation programs and plans for further transformation. UIC recently received a five-year, $19.2M USDOE Institute of Education Sciences multi-institutional research grant to support reading for understanding for middle and high schoolers. In special education, the USDOE twice awarded UIC’s Monarch Center multi-year, multi-million contracts to provide technical assistance nationwide to teachers prepared in minority institutions of higher education (MIHEs) to work with children with disabilities who come from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds. UIC is open to new ideas and embraces external review as a foundation of scientific validity. The national recognition we’ve received for elementary and special education teacher preparation and in literacy is sharply at odds with NCTQ’s findings. We would welcome a third-party review of NCTQ’s assessment methodology.
www.nctq.org/edschoolreports
1