Education 311: Foundations of Education
Term: Day Cohort – Fall, 2010
Course Number: Educ 311
Instructor: John M. Shields, Ph.D.
Office Phone: (219) 473-4262
Email Address: jshields@ccsj.edu
Office Hours: T.B.A.
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; Or By Appointment
Instructor’s Background:
Educational: Ph.D. in Constructive Theology from Loyola University of Chicago (2004); M.A. in Theology from the University of Notre Dame (1999); Ph.D. and M.Ed. in Educational Administration and Supervision from Loyola University of Chicago (1987 and 1976 respectively); B.A. in Philosophy from Tolentine College (19= 72).
Professional: Serve =
as
Associate Professor at
Course Time and Location: M-R,
Course Description:
When one engages in the art= and science which teaching is, one does so from within the context of a history= and a culture. This is inevitable since all human beings belong to a community steeped in a history in which ideas, values, and beliefs are shared, challe= nged, transformed, and transmitted over time. Thus, what we teach, why we teach, = and how we teach are always informed, either implicitly or explicitly (and for better or for worse), by the philosophical, historical, social, and legal foundations which serve as the underpinnings for our professional actions as educators. This course will, therefore, serve to facilitate a clearer, and = thus more explicit, understanding of those foundations.
Our goal then is twofold: to come to a greater underst= anding of the philosophical, historical, and legal foundations of American educati= on, and to come to evaluate those foundations with a view towards developing our own personal professional self-reflective philosophy of education. Thus, while = this course will offer the student the opportunity to appropriate the relevant historical, philosophical, legal facts/concepts available in a “foundations” course in American education, the primary goal of this course is to facilitate the critically reflective development of a coh= erent philosophy of education.
Prerequisites:= Educ 200
Textbook: The American Teacher: Foundations of
Education by Parkerson and
Parkerson (
Learning Outcomes/Competencies:
Thus, students in this cour= se will:
&nbs= p; Come to understand the key philosophical stances over time that have come to influence what, why, and how American educators have come to teach and to demonstrate that understanding by the development of teaching strategies wh= ich reflect those various stances.
&nbs= p; Come to understand the major factors and themes that have and continue to inform= the historical project which American education is and to make a critical evaluative judgment of those themes.
&nbs= p; Come to understand the legal nature of the project of American education. This w= ill require an understanding the key facts/concepts inherent in a legal understanding of the American educational system(s).
&nbs= p; Come to synthesize and critically appropriate foundational understandings into a personal and professional philosophy of education that demonstrates the disposition appropriate to a professional educator.
Understanding, making criti= cal evaluative judgments, and synthesizing those understandings and judgments i= nto a clear and coherent professional philosophy of education require that teac= her candidates become “reflective practitioners.” Thus, INTACS Principle #9 applies to this course, as does NBPTS Core proposition # 4, wherein teachers “think systematically about their practice and learn from experience.”
Learning Strategies:
&nbs= p; As one may note from above, the overarching goal of the course is to explore – in a communal, sharing fashion – those facts, concepts, theme= s, ideas, etc. which have and continue to influence our educational decisions concerning what, why, and how we teach. In the very fact that we ask the “what,” “why,” and “how” questions, we = are asking “foundational” questions, questions which demand the articulation of a philosophy of education. Thus, the facts and concepts whi= ch we will uncover – via lectures, presentations, observations, an interview field experience, and evaluative discussions – will all, hopefully, serve to support our final outcome: the development of a personal philosophy of education. Given my own belief that adults learn best in dialogue, in conversation that can be informative, challenging, and potenti= ally transformative, I encourage active participation in the class. Moreover, gi= ven the “compact” nature of the cohort class, I greatly discourage absence from class except in the case of dire emergency.
Assessment:
&nbs= p; 1. 20% of Grade = - &= nbsp; Field Experience: Interview & Reflective Essay
&nbs= p; 2. 20% of Grade = - &= nbsp; Major Class Presentations on:
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; a. Educational Philosopher or
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; b. Educational Leader/Theorist or
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; c. Significant Court Case on Education
&nbs= p; 3. 40% of Grade = - &= nbsp; Final Exam – Synthesis Essays
&nbs= p; 4. 20% of Grade &= nbsp; - &= nbsp; Completion of One’s Philosophy of Education
Please note that all assignments will be due on the da= ys specified on the calendar below. There will be no exceptions – given again the compacted nature of the cohort class and the need to adhere stric= tly to the schedule. All written assignments are to be typed and double spaced – properly checked in advance for any grammatical and spelling errors. Teachers must be models of the exemplary use of the English language!
Grading will be according to the standard scale:
&nbs= p; A: 90-100 &= nbsp; B: 80-89 &n= bsp; C: 70-79 &n= bsp; D: 60-69 &n= bsp; F: 59 and below.
<= /p>
Calendar:
Day One &nb= sp; = Introduction: Goals and Tasks
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Video Presentation: Dead Poets Society
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p;
Day Two &nb= sp; = Reflection on video in relation to a Philosophy of Education
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Introduction to Philosophies of Education – Sample Handouts
Day Three &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Philosophies of Education continued
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Summary of Major Philosophical Schools
Day Fou= r &= nbsp; Blackboard Assignment – Research and Post: A comprehensive
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; report in the form of a Power Point Presentation&= nbsp; on a major educational philosopher or leader or an educationally rel= ated court case – no class today
Day Five &n= bsp; &= nbsp; Introduction to the History of American Education
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Videos of School: The Story of American Public Education, 1&2
Day Six &nb= sp; = Student Reports: Key Educational Philosophers and Leaders
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Synthesis on the History of American Education: The Kaestle Thesis
Day Seven &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Introduction to the Legal Foundations of American Education
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Process Handout on Government Roles
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; School: The Story of American Public Education, 3
Day Eight &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Released Time for Field Experience
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Visit and Interview a public or non-public educator
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Purpose: To discover her/his philosophy of education
Day Nine &n= bsp; = ; Student Reports: Court Cases related to American Education
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Synthesis on Legal Foundations of American Education
Day Ten &nb= sp; = Student Reports: Reflective Essay on Field Experience
&= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; View Jonathan Kozol video: Hearts of Children and the Obligation of the Natio= n’s Schools
Day Eleven = &nb= sp; Student Presentations of Personal Philosophies of Education
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p;
Day Twelve = &nb= sp; Final Exam distribution and explanation of the task
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p;
The Final exam is due to Dr. Shields on Monday, Novemb= er 15h. No Exceptions!
Sample Student Report Topics (to be presented in Po= wer Point format):
&nbs=
p; Philosophers:
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Aristotle
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Rousseau
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Dewey
&nbs= p; Educational Leaders: Quintillian
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Pestalozzi
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Froebel
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Mann
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Catherine Beecher
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Cubberley
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Piaget
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Montessori
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Friere
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp; Kozol =
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; &= nbsp;
&nbs=
p; Court
Cases:
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Tinker
v.
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Goss v. Lopez
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Ingraham v. Wright
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p;
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Hazelwood v. Kuhlmeier
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Abington Twp. V. Schempp & Enge= l v. Vitale
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p;
&nbs=
p; &=
nbsp; &nbs=
p; Cochran v.
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Lemon V. Kurtzman
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Brown v. Board of Education (and Br= own II)
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Lau v. Nichols
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Board of Education (Pottowattomie) = v. Earls
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p; Zelman v. Simmons-Harris
&nbs= p; &= nbsp; &nbs= p;
Report Formats/Rubrics:<= o:p>
For Philosophers and Edu= cational Leaders/Theorists:
a. = Identify his/her historical context
b. Identify her/his central tenets
c. = Evaluate his/her unique educational position/contribution
d. Applying her/his position to a classroom setting.
For Court Cases:
a. = Provide appropriate case/historical background
b. Provide a summary brief of the decision
c. = Clearly explain the decision and its legal rationale.
d. Identify the decision’s implications for education and a practical example of = the decision’s effect on a school.
For Philosophies of Educ= ation:
Ensure the presence of the= key components of a philosophy of education in your presentation, i.e., metaphysics, axiology; and epistemology: What? Why? and How? From your pers= onal but critically reflective perspective.
Statement Regarding Plagiarism:
If an instructor or other C= alumet College of St. Joseph personnel finds that a student has plagiarized or been involved in another form of academic dishonesty, the instructor or other personnel may elect to bring the matter up for judicial review. The maximum penalty for any form of academic dishonesty is dismissal from the College. = The procedures for judicial review are listed under the section of the CCSJ Handbook which addresses student grievances. (Academic Planner).
Withdrawal From Class Policy:
After the last day for class changes has passed (see College calendar), a student may withdraw from a co= urse in which she/he is registered with permission from the faculty member conducting the course. A written request detailing the reason(s) for the withdrawal must be filed with the Registrar. Written request for withdrawal must be received by the Registrar by the last day of classes prior to the f= inal examination dates specified in the Catalogue. Written requests may be maile= d to the Registrar or faxed to the College fax number, 219-473-4259. Students ar= e to make note of the refund schedule when withdrawing from courses. The request= is forwarded to the faculty member, who makes the final determination to accep= t or deny the request. If the request is honored, the student will receive notification of official withdrawal; if denied, the notification will indic= ate why the withdrawal is disallowed. Note: Degree Completion Division (DCD) students should consult the DCD Student Handbook for information on DCD withdrawals.
An official withdrawal is r= ecorded as a “W” grade on the student’s transcripts. Dropping a course without written permission automatically incurs an “F” g= rade for the course (see Refund Schedule).
Education Dep=
artment
Attendance Policy:
Intellectual growth and suc= cess in college is reinforced through interaction in the classroom. Students reach personal goals and = course outcomes through regular and prompt attendance. The Education Department’s accelerated classes are intense and rigorous and demand student presence and participation. Therefore, if a student is absent from a cohort class three times, the student will be academically withdrawn by the instructor on the third day.<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>
Tutoring Center Information:
The
Disability Services
The Student Support Services Office is the primary off= ice to guide, counsel and assist students with disabilities. If you have reasonable accommodation needs (e.g., extended time needed for tests, note taking assistance, special testing arrangements, etc.) because of a disabil= ity, contact the Student Support Services Office at 219-473-4388. Student Support Services staff will require documentation pertinent to your disabil= ity. If you already receive services through the Student Support Services Office and require accommodations for this class, make an appointment as so= on as possible to discuss your needs. Calumet College of St. Joseph will hold any information you share in the strictest confidence unless you reque= st that it be shared.