TOTOS SEEP Grant EE/ESE Program Descriptions

Sustainability and Environmental Education for Pre-Service (SEEP)

Information needed

Information to share

Name(s) of instructor(s)

Mark Roddy

Name of university

Seattle University

Level of preparation for the program being described: elementary, middle school, high school (or combination)

Elementary and Middle-level

University course number

TEED 521

University course title

ELEMENTARY CURRICULUM, INSTRUCTION AND ASSESSMENT (15 CREDITS)

University course catalogue description

Graduate Bulletin Description: Thematic course in developing curriculum and instructional strategies to teach reading and language arts, social studies, mathematics, science, arts, and specitopics in elementary school. Assessment techniques, instructionaltechnology and media are integrated throughout. This course is offered at an elementary school.

Objectives

(big ideas are fine)

The course objectives are based on Washington state standards anthose of the national professional education organizations.

At the conclusion of this course, the student will be able to:

  1. Create learning experiences that make subject matter meaningfor students.
  2. Demonstrate an understanding the ethical and moral complexities of schooling and develop a values position in relation to ethical and moral issues.
  3. Demonstrate an understanding of the social/political dimensions of schooling.
  4. Design/adapt developmentally appropriate instruction that is informed by EALRs/GLE’s, curriculum standards, enduring understandings of content, and depth of thinking.
  5. Make instructional decisions based on knowledge of learning, child/adolescent development, and diverse learners with a repertoire of teaching and communication strategies.
  6. Differentiate instruction to meet individual needs and use content knowledge to inform instructional practice.
  7. Use instructional strategies to develop critical thinking, problem solving, application and understanding of curricular content.
  8. Use an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior to create learning environments that encourage positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.
  9. Use technology effectively to enhance student learning.
  10. Seek information from multiple communities; consider student learning in the context of social, political, environmental, and economic systems; and create opportunities for students to participate in responsible civic engagement, including developmentally appropriate self-governance.
  11. Apply multiple formative and summative assessment strategies to assess student learning and inform instruction, use assessment results to determine effectiveness of instruction, and modify teaching practices based on assessment results.
  12. Foster relationships with school colleagues, parents, and agencies in the larger community to support students' learning and well being.
  13. Demonstrate an understanding of issues of diversity and multiculturalism and apply understanding to educational decisions.
  14. Continually reflect on and evaluate the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (students, parents, and other professionals) and actively seek opportunities to grow professionally.

Description of the experience(s) the pre-service teachers had to learn EE-ESE strategies

(This is the main, detailed description)

Students in our teacher certification program, the Master in Teaching program at Seattle University, engaged in a strand of our methods and assessment block focused on environmental education. This strand was part of a larger strand dealing with mathematics and science education. The students considered the needs of students in grades k-8, the current standards in this area, and the ways in which teachers might address the pertinent needs of their students. As part of this strand, teacher candidates engaged in a 5-hour workshop dealing with environmental education using the curriculum, Project Learning Tree. Other curricula were explored as well.

For this assignment small groups of Seattle University students worked together to create a day of environmental education for students at Echo Lake Elementary, our partnership school. In concert with colleagues and in consultation with a teacher at Echo Lake, they developed the plans for the lessons and implemented them at Echo Lake. Early on, they met with a cooperating (practicing) teacher with whom you would work. The students, in consultation with the teacher, decided on a topic that would fit in his or her curriculum and developed ideas for teaching. They consulted the Washington State Commission on Student Learning Essential Academic Learning Requirements or GLEs as appropriate and selected appropriate standard(s) to be addressed in the instruction. The lessons were designed to involve the students in an active investigation of the relevant concepts. The lessons were drafted by the students, reviewed by the cooperating teachers and by the university professor, revised and then implemented.

Materials/equipment needed for the pre-service teacher experience (include technology that may have been used)

We had a 5-hour workshop on Project Learning Tree.

Were preK-12 children involved? (Yes or no). If yes, describe their involvement and ages.

Yes. As described above, our students worked with students in grades k-6 on a full day of instruction centered on environmental education. Seven classrooms were involved in grades k-6. The teacher candidates, working in teams of 3-4 and in cooperation with practicing teachers at our partnership school developed and taught a full day of EE.

Was this an indoor or outdoor project (or both)?

Describe the setting.

The instruction varied from room to room. Some took students out doors for part of the day. Others did not.

Were other subject area professors involved? Yes or no. If yes, what subjects were integrated? How?

No.

Were there community/ agency/institution partners? Yes or no. If yes, how was the partnership structured?

Only in an informal sense. That is, our teacher candidates often took advantage of materials offered by various agencies in and around Seattle but no formal partnership was established.

How was the program evaluated? What did the pre-service teachers have to say?

Informal discussions with both the teacher candidates and the cooperating (practicing) teachers in the partnership school indicated that the experience was well received by one and all.

Other?

?

If another grant was written to support your EE-ESE work, what types of things would you hope to accomplish?

N/A

Thank you!