Evan Halloran Leuenberger

MATC Synthesis Paper

December 2021
Introduction
I graduated with my bachelors from Michigan States University’s College of Education

in 2016. When I graduated Michigan State boasted the best Education program in the country for

its preparation of teachers. I experienced that excellence first hand, as it prepared me well for my

future career in Education. I have been consistently complimented for my instruction skills and

for the climate I create in my classroom, having served on building leadership teams at every

school I have worked at since graduating. I give a great deal of credit to Michigan State

University. My courses in Education taught me to think critically about my instruction and how

best to relate to the students I work with.

When it came time to consider where to attend for my Masters degree, it was not a

difficult decision for me. In addition to having the country’s best program for K-12 instruction,

Michigan State has also been recognized for its top ranking in Education Masters programs as

well. The program for a Masters in Teaching and Curriculum especially appealed to me, because

curriculum has always been an area of interest for me. I’ve seen how curriculum can be well

crafted to suit the needs of students and state standards through years of careful consideration

and adjustments. I’d also worked in places with no real curriculum and little attention paid to it. I

wanted to study how best to make curriculum work for all stakeholders in the school and

community. Over the course of my career so far I’ve also seen firsthand how important literacy

is, both in terms of my social studies classroom, but also far beyond that as well. I wanted to

study how best to set my students up for success, and to arm them with the literacy skills be to

successful for the rest of their education careers and into adulthood. For those reasons, I entered

the MATC program excited to learn even more about curriculum and literacy. I have never

regretted that decision since.

Synthesis of My Program Experience
My first year in the MATC program actually began in the Fall of 2016 during my

internship year. In TE 801 and TE 803 with professor Dave Reid, we focused on various

“problems of practice” many of us were experiencing while student teaching, focusing especially

on strategies for classroom management. The courses fostered our skills in critical inquiry, and

align closely with standard four of the MATC program in terms of reflective, systematic inquiry

and refinement of one’s practice. Throughout the course we tackled various issues commonly

faced by early teachers, whether it be in working with different types of students, or the process

of setting up our classroom rules and expectations.

One of the major assignments in TE 801 was titled “Understanding Students,” and it

called on us to select two students who were potentially being disruptive in our classes and to dig

deeper, hypothesizing about why they might be acting the way they are and implementing

various interventions to try to redirect their behavior. That assignment has proven to be

extremely impactful in my experiences since then, and changed my mindset in terms of

approaching misbehavior through an analytical lens and implementing interventions to achieve

desired results.

TE 803 was in many ways a continuation of TE 801, and it encouraged us to analyze our

teaching techniques and try new ones. In the major project in that course, we needed to select a

problem of practice, and try different potential solutions to see which worked best for us. In that

project I wanted to tackle ways of making social studies more engaging for students, and focused

on differentiating my teaching techniques to engage for types of learners in the classroom. When

teaching about Westward expansion I created a project where students had many different

options in terms of the type of projects they could create. Some made dioramas, others wrote
short stories, and one even wrote and performed a song for the class on his guitar about the forty-

niners. TE 803 taught me that I need to have room for creativity in my classroom, and to take

every opportunity to get students thinking creatively if I want to keep them engaged.

TE 802 and TE 804 both focused on social studies specifically, with classes focused on

different types of activities that work well in social studies as well as creating lesson plans and

unit plans. The course aligned closely with standard two of the MATC program, that teachers

need to understand the subject matter, how to teach it, and how to design curriculum, instruction,

and assessment to foster students’ understanding. In TE 802 I wrote my first unit plan, on the

Road to Revolution, planning out the activities that would fill the next two weeks. One of the

great aspects of the course was that after we taught out unit plan, we then needed to go back and

critique how it went. That critical inquiry after the unit had passed has been an invaluable

experience, and taught me to take the time and reflect on the aspects that went well or needed

improvement in future years, as opposed to just moving on to the next topic. TE 803 and TE 804

also highlighted different types of activities, like setting up debates and Socratic Seminars with

our students, to model good citizenship in our classroom.

After a brief hiatus while teaching in the metro-Detroit area, I rejoined my MSU

community for TE 808. TE 808 focused on the importance of action research in the educational

setting, aligning closely with standard three of the program, understanding and use of theoretical

perspectives and conceptual frameworks to situate and analyze issues and problems of practice

and policy. We had to identify an issue relating to our daily practice, and turn to existing

literature looking for possible solutions. In that project I looked again for ways to increase the

engagement in social studies, especially since it was a pandemic school year where I needed as

many tools as I could get to keep students tuned in. Again, MSU emphasized taking an
analytical, research-based approach, and during my research I came up with many different

strategies to try in my classroom. One that I found, and would prove to come up again and again

in my other courses at MSU, was to make sure students see representation of themselves and

their culture in the classroom.

Another enormous benefit of TE 808 was the modeling of how collaborative teams can

work together to aid one another in refining research and creating reports. In the course we were

divided into small teams of three or four colleagues, divided according to grade level or content

area. While we each completed our own research separately, we were in constant contact,

looking over one another’s work and offering feedback. This element of TE 808 aligned closely

with standard six of the programs, proactive participation in collaborative initiatives,

professional learning communities, professional organizations, and teacher leadership beyond the

classroom. Again, I saw how MSU’s emphasis on taking scientific, analytical approaches to

classroom problems of practice and be enormously beneficial, and improve a teachers classroom

practice.

In TE 843 Secondary Reading Assessment & Instruction with Professor Hartman, we

focused on inquiry, and how we can use inquiry to drive literacy instruction, learning and

assessment which aligns with goal one of the program. We created lesson and unit plans based

around the types of literacies and how best we can improve our student’s literacy skills.

Professor Hartman emphasized the importance of getting to know our students and their interests

when it comes to crafting the curriculum in our classes. I learned that students learn best when

they seem themselves in the characters and topics we learn about every day. It is a theme I would

see again and again in the MATC program. For one project in the course, we focused on one

student in our classroom in particular to answer questions like who that learner is as a reader and
what kinds of things they read. I used a student survey to ask my student what kinds of books he

enjoys reading inside and outside of school to get an idea of his interests. I also had to reach out

to his ELA teacher and our school’s literacy specialist to get feedback around that students skills

and areas for improvement when it came to reading. This collaboration and feedback generation

aligns with standard one, understanding and commitment to students and their diversity, and to

standard six, proactive participation in collaborative initiatives, professional learning

communities, professional organizations, and teacher leadership beyond the classroom. By

working together with that students’ other teachers, we were able to collaborate and work on

strategies to better engage that student.

Professor Hartman also incorporated a focus on elements of design into his course, and

had activities based around effective presentation design and formatting. He taught us various

design essentials, like the importance of contrasting colors, size, and placement of texts and

images in presentations we create for students. We also read and prepared presentations on

literature about design elements. This part of his course corresponds to standard four, reflective,

systematic inquiry and study and refinement of one’s practice, as well as standard five,

communication skills and information literacy. By being more thoughtful of how we

communicate information to students, we can increase their likelihood of learning and retaining

the information. This instruction has proved invaluable, and I continue to use these important

elements of good design in my instruction on a daily basis.

In the summer of 2021, I accelerated my course load and took three courses that summer.

The first, TE 846, was all about literacy skills on our classroom, and disciplinary literacy. We

learned that there are different types of reading in different subject areas, and that we need to be

mindful of being explicit in developing different disciplinary literacy skills. For example, in
social studies, I learned I need to be explicit in explaining to students how to read a map, or

analyze a primary or secondary source document. This instruction on how to teach disciplinary

literacy skills in my social studies classroom closely relates to standard two, understanding of

subject matter, how to teach t, and how to design curriculum, instruction, and assessment to

foster students’ understandings. Before the class I am guilty of having assumed students would

be able to look at a map and understand it, but after TE 846 I learned how to better foster those

different types of literacies in social studies.

Another key aspect of TE 846 was a focus on literacy skills in particular, and how to

work with different types of readers. We focused on three types of assessment that would help

our students. The first was an interest inventory, a survey for students to fill out so the teacher

can gauge their interests and literacy skills. We also learned about how to administer a

retroactive miscue analysis, so that we and our students can identify parts of the reading process

that need attention and development. Finally, we studied the Think-Aloud as a tool to determine

how well students understand what they read. As part of the course, we had the opportunity to

focus on one of our students in particular to assess using the three literacy tools. Again, this case

study of one particular student represents the program’s commitment to standard one, that

teachers understand and commit to students and their diversity. By focusing on that one

particular student we developed skills that we can apply throughout our classrooms.

In TE 825, Diverse Learners & Learning Subject Matter, we discussed diversity for the

umbrella term that it is. Each week we focused on a different topic like sexuality, language

diversity, and racial diversity, and how that diversity can impact student’s’ experiences in the

classroom. For each topic we would read theoretical and practical literature about that topic

before writing a critical analysis reflecting on how we have addressed or not addressed that topic
in our previous classroom instruction. Those critical reflections relate excellently to standard

three, understanding and use of theoretical perspectives and conceptual frameworks to situate

and analyze issues and problems of practice and policy. We also engaged in a book club while

reading Un-Standardizing Curriculum: Multicultural Teaching in the Standards-Based Classroom

by Sleeter & Carmona, and we would comment on one another’s observations when reading,

offering each other advice in terms of our similar or different experiences.

In TE 825 we developed skills for our anti-racist toolkit, and learned that being anti-racist

isn’t something you can suddenly achieve, but instead is a lifelong practice of combating racism

and inequality, and improving the world for everyone. Taking the course led me be reflective of

my past practice, thus reaching standard four of the MATC program. Taking the course in the

wake of George Floyd’s passing, and ongoing Critical Race Theory hysteria, led me to

acknowledge I needed to do a better job of creating an open and honest environment in my

classroom where students can feel secure discussing issues of race and racism in my classroom.

Since taking the course I have been more thoughtful of how my students from diverse

backgrounds engage with class content and am even more receptive to student feedback and

interests. TE 825 brought me back to ideas I saw emphasized in TE 843 and 846, that students

need to see themselves in the class content and be able to make connections to it, in order for

them to best embrace and learn the information. I now bring that idea into my classroom every

day.

TE 865 was a return to my social studies roots and we discussed different teaching

strategies and topics for the social studies classroom. I took the course when there was

controversy surrounding the teaching of critical race theory, so that topic came up frequently in

the course. In one assignment, we had to find an existing lesson plan online and write a critique
of the lesson plan using the five standards for excellent social studies instruction. The course

aligned closely with standard two of the MATC program, understanding of subject matter, how

to teach it, and how to design curriculum, instruction, and assessment to foster students’

understanding. I had never encountered those five ideals for effective social studies instruction

spelled out so explicitly, and now I make sure to incorporate them into my daily lessons to

improve the quality of my teacher.

In TE 865 we also worked on using film or books in the social studies classroom, and

how to analyze those resources through a critical lens. I used the film Coco, and wrote about the

strengths and weaknesses of using it in class. This emphasis on goal one, critical inquiry, taught

me to be more thoughtful in the selection of literature or films I bring into my social studies

classroom, and to use racial or gendered lens when viewing class content. I came away from the

class empowered with new skills and theoretical perspectives that have made me a better social

studies teacher today.

I finished my graduate studies by taking TE 849 and TE 870. In TE 849, we are looked

critically at children’s and adolescents’ literature that we might use in our classroom. I took the

course, even though I’m not an ELA teacher, because I am a big believer in fostering students’

love for reading, and I wanted to learn different skills around using books in class. Each week

was a different genre or topic, like fairy tales, science fiction, and books about gender and

sexuality. An important component of the course is participating in book clubs with classmates,

digging into the various novels and collaborating with one another in the analysis of the book.

These book clubs relate to standard six, proactive participation in collaborative initiatives,

professional learning communities, professional organizations, and teacher leadership. Each

week we brought our own observations and questions, and through the book club conversations
really learned from one another and taught each other concrete skills and new perspectives to

take into our own instruction. I also encountered again the importance of providing students with

characters and content that match their own. We learned about the power of ‘window’ texts that

provide insight into other perspectives, and ‘mirrors’ which reflect characters and experiences

that might be similar to our students. Good educators build empathy in our students by providing

them with both types of text, so they can relate to their own life experiences and view totally

different kinds as well.

Finally in my capstone course TE 870, we discussed global perspectives on curriculum

development, and best practices in working on curriculum teams. We read Jon Wiles’ Leading

Curriculum Development, and the book offered excellent and concrete advice on how to go

about the curriculum development cycle. Taking the course lead me to a great deal of critical

analysis of how my own district runs its curriculum development, and I am leaving the course

feeling empowered to help my district improve.

Conclusion
Reflecting on all my experiences in the MATC program, I feel confident I am a better,

more thoughtful teacher today than I was when I started. I saw again and again the importance of

diversifying my class content and opening up my classroom for difficult but important

conversations that students should feel safe discussing with their teacher and one another. I

learned more about what effective social studies instruction looks like, and different theoretical

perspectives and practical skills to put that knowledge into practice. Finally, I learned the

importance of meaningful curriculum development, what it looks like, and how to build that

curriculum where I teach.

 Works Cited

Sleeter, C. & Carmona, J. (2016). Un-Standardizing Curriculum: Multicultural Teaching in the Standards-

Based Classroom. 2 nd Edition. Teachers College Press: New York.

Wiles, J. (2009). Leading curriculum development. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Corwin Press.