Foundational Knowledge

International Literacy International Dyslexia Course / Artifact

Association Association

Standard 1: Foundational Standard A: Foundation SPED 638 Tool Kit Collection

Knowledge Concepts about Oral and
Written Learning SPED 637 Characteristic
Crosswalk
Standard B: Knowledge of
the Structure of Language

Standard C: Knowledge of
Dyslexia and other Learning
Disorders

Synthesis of Standards

ILA Standard 1 and IDA Standards A, B, and C are grouped together because these

standards are the basis for all of the work that is done in literacy – including a specific

knowledge of characteristics found in students who are struggling with literacy. ILA Standard 1

is gigantic when viewed as a single standard. Thankfully, it has been broken up into smaller

components that more closely align with IDA Standards A, B, and C.

ILA Standard 1 Components 1 and 2 closely relates to IDA Standard A. ILA Standard 1

Components 1 and 2 combine to lay the groundwork for reading and writing while IDA Standard

A covers oral and written learning. ILA Standard 1 refers to the Big Five while IDA Standard A

breaks down the language processing requirements for reading (including phonological,

orthographic, semantic, syntactic, and discourse). These standards also find that the literacy

specialist has a keen understanding of the “typical” development of these reading and writing

skills throughout the grades. IDA Standard A is a little more explicit in the humanistic approach

to literacy as it specifically states a literacy specialist should be able to identify and define the

environmental, cultural, and social factors that contribute to literacy development. ILA Standard

1.1 and 1.2 mentions the theoretical, conceptual, historical, and evidence-based components of
reading and writing, however, they leave out these other important pieces. IDA Standard A also

mentions aspects of cognition that can affect reading development, such as memory,

processing speed, attention, etc. As a literacy specialist, I also appreciate IDA Standard A’s

component of knowing reasonable goals and expectations for learners at different stages of

reading and writing development.

ILA Standard 1 Component 3 and IDA Standard B are closely related as they both

discuss the concepts of language. ILA 1.3 is very general in it’s broad statement of, “theoretical,

conceptual, historical, and evidence-based components of language”. IDA Standard B moves to

identify the specific pieces that a literacy specialist is to be familiar with: phonology,

orthography, morphology, semantics, and syntax. These standards are not simply discussing

the acquisition of language, but also conventions, vocabulary, and spelling. ILA 1.3 also

includes speaking, listening, and visually representing as components of language. The last of

those (visually representing) is especially powerful as we consider 21st century literacies and

how we no longer simply live in a world of reading and writing.

ILA Standard 1 and IDA Standard C are paired as the knowledge from ILA Standard 1

will aide in the identification of students with dyslexia and other learning disorders. ILA Standard

1 requires the literacy specialist understand the progression of development for students in

reading, writing, and language development. IDA Standard C helps the literacy specialist

identify students who are struggling due to dyslexia or another learning disorder. IDA Standard

C also includes a knowledge of how symptoms may change over time and in response to

instruction. This allows the literacy specialist to be a resource to all teachers in helping students

who are struggling readers as the literacy specialist learns the background of specific students.

IDA Standard C also includes an understanding of intrinsic factors that differ between “good”

and “poor” readers.

When examining for major differences between the standards, ILA standard 1 is

definitely geared more toward a general education setting. ILA Standard 1 includes a piece in
which the literacy specialist understands the specific role of reading/literacy specialist. IDA is

geared more towards the knowing of foundational skills to aide in the identification of students

with disabilities (mostly contained in IDA Standard C).

Before a literacy specialist can move into designing and choosing curriculum in the

classroom or assessing literacy skills and abilities, they must have this foundational knowledge.

They must recognize what the skills are, what they look like, and what the “typical” progression

is over time. The literacy specialist must recognize each student for his/her individuality. There

are cultural and environmental factors that play a major role in development – and each student

comes with a different story. There are also varied levels of development and cognition that

students possess. Once this knowledge is obtained (both theoretical and student contextual

factors), proper evidence-based practices can be implemented in instruction in all settings -from

whole class to small group to individualized instruction (tiers 1-3).

Summary of Artifacts

Artifact #1 Toolkit Collections (See 1st Box Below)

In SPED 638 we took the foundational pieces (collectively known as the Big 5) of literacy

(comprehension, vocabulary, fluency, phonics, and phonemic awareness) and created toolkits

that demonstrated fundamental knowledge of each specific topic. Each toolkit consisted of a

peer-reviewed journal article, a practitioner article, an overview of the practice that was

presented in the practitioner article, then finally a lesson plan that specifically addressed the

piece of the Big 5 that we were discussing.

Artifact #2 Characteristic Crosswalk (See 2nd Box Below)

In SPED 637 we had the opportunity to dive into the specific characteristics of dyslexia

along with other learning disabilities. We placed these characteristics on a table in order to
better view the similarities and differences between dyslexia and other learning disabilities. We

cited peer-reviewed journal articles to identify the characteristics listed.

Evidence of Application

ILA Standard 1 and IDA Standard A and B discuss the foundations of reading, writing,

and language. The toolkit collection discusses, in depth, the Big 5 in literacy from both an

academic and practical viewpoint. We examined the theoretical and conceptual as we read,

summarized, and discussed the peer-reviewed journal articles for each of the components.

These articles discussed the theory surrounding the literacy concept. Many of them included the

expected progression of development seen in students. Evidence-based components/practices

were evaluated as we dove into practitioner articles related to comprehension, vocabulary,

fluency, phonics, and phonemic awareness. Journals that were used to find information were

cited at the end of each toolkit. While it is difficult to “demonstrate knowledge” of foundational

concepts, by gathering both theoretical and evidence-based practices, putting them together

along with a suggested lesson plan (with accommodations) for students struggling in each

concept area, I have demonstrated I have a firm grasp of the basic foundational knowledge

required of a literacy specialist.

In addressing IDA Standard C, I worked with colleagues to complete the characteristic

crosswalk (artifact 2). We looked at peer-reviewed journal articles discussing dyslexia as well as

other learning disabilities. With the understanding gained from the toolkits (ILA Standard 1 and

IDA Standard A and B) we were able to first discuss the “typical” progression of students in the

general education population. We then discussed the symptoms that we would see in students

and how these symptoms would change over time. It is only when our foundational knowledge

form ILA Standard 1 and IDA Standards A and B were complete that we could then move to a

complete understanding of IDA Standard C.

 These artifacts combined have given me the confidence as a literacy specialist that

given a particular student, I can appropriately identify whether or not the student is making

adequate progress in reading, writing, and language development. If the student is not making

adequate progress, I have the foundational knowledge of dyslexia as well as other learning

disorders to give me a general idea of what may be the root cause of the difficulties and then,

using my knowledge of assessment (demonstrated later in the portfolio), I am able to

strategically use appropriate evidence based practices to help the student find academic

success.