Kennesaw state university graduate course proposal or revision



Download 195.75 Kb.
Date conversion20.04.2016
Size195.75 Kb.
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY

GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,

Cover Sheet (10/02/2013)
Course Number/Program Name: INED 8335

Department: Inclusive Education

Degree Title: (if applicable) Ed.S/Ed.D. in Special Education

Proposed Effective Date: Summer 2014


Check one or more of the following and complete the appropriate sections:

Sections to be Completed

X New Course Proposal II, III, IV, V, VII

Course Title Change I, II, III

Course Number Change I, II, III

Course Credit Change I, II, III

Course Prerequisite Change I, II, III

Course Description Change I, II, III
Notes:

If proposed changes to an existing course are substantial (credit hours, title, and description), a new course with a new number should be proposed.

A new Course Proposal (Sections II, III, IV, V, VII) is required for each new course proposed as part of a new program.  Current catalog information (Section I) is required for each existing course incorporated into the program.

Minor changes to a course can use the simplified E-Z Course Change Form.


Submitted by: Harriet Bessette _____

Faculty Member Date



Approved Not Approved Karen Kuhel

Department Curriculum Committee Date



Approved Not Approved Patricia McHatton

Department Chair Date



Approved Not Approved

College Curriculum Committee Date



Approved Not Approved

College Dean Date



Approved Not Approved

GPCC Chair Date



Approved Not Approved

Dean, Graduate College Date



Approved Not Approved

Vice President for Academic Affairs Date



Approved Not Approved

President Date



KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY

GRADUATE COURSE/CONCENTRATION/PROGRAM CHANGE

I. Current Information (Fill in for changes)

Page Number in Current Catalog N/A ___

Course Prefix and Number ___

Course Title ___

Class Hours ____Laboratory Hours_______Credit Hours________

Prerequisites ___

Description (or Current Degree Requirements)
II. Proposed Information (Fill in for changes and new courses)

Course Prefix and Number: _ INED 8335___________________________

Course Title: __ Special Education from a Historical Perspective _________

Class Hours: 3____Laboratory Hours___0____CreditHours____3____

Prerequisites: Admission to the Ed.S./Ed.D. Program or Instructor/Program Coordinator Approval _

Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements):


This course addresses the historical evolution of educational services for individuals with disabilities within an ethic of justice framework. Critical analysis of the impact of events related to human rights and cross-cultural views of education and disability are emphasized. Candidates will examine ethical dilemmas from legal, theoretical, contextual and practical perspectives to expand their view of education as it applies to all students in diverse P-12 classrooms.


III. Justification


Tracing the evolution of the field of special education and examining the histories, legacies, and positionalities that have contributed to the shaping of contemporary institutional practices in the field are crucial if we are to assist candidates in understanding their role as educational change agents. This course provides candidates with multiple opportunities to investigate the origins of special education in order to gain a better understanding of the role of deficit-thinking - which hampers progress for individuals with disabilities - and the needed shift to an asset-based model that can support equitable learning opportunities for individuals with disabilities while effectuating positive change.

IV. Additional Information (for New Courses only)

Instructor: Harriet Bessette (Also: McHatton, P; Brown, S; and Zimmer, K.)

Texts:

Required:
Danforth, S. (2009). The Incomplete Child (Disability Studies in Education) NY: Peter Lang.

Lipsky, D. K., & Gartner, A. (1989). Beyond Separate Education: Quality Education for All. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.


Winzer, M. A. (2009). A History of Special Education in the 20th Century: From Integration to Inclusion. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Recommended:
Kode, K., & Howard, K. (Editor). (2002). Elizabeth Farrell and the History of Special Education. Arlington, VA: Council Exceptional Children.
Osgood, R. L. (2007). The History of Special Education: A Struggle for Equality in American Public Schools. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Additional Readings provided in class.

Prerequisites: Admission to the Ed.D program in Special Education.


Objectives:
1. Candidates will analyze the shifting social and cultural constructions of disability from pre-1700 through the early twentieth century and from the mid- twentieth century to current day by examining historical highlights.
2. Candidates will explore the philosophies, principles, theories, laws and policies that were shaped by major federal legislation and litigation after 1960.
3. Candidates will critique the historical, social and cross-cultural foundations that frame our response to disability today.
4. Candidates will discuss the distinction between the study of special education and disability studies from a historical perspective on special education.
5. Candidates will research cross-cultural understandings of disability from a historical perspective.
6. Candidates will critique and summarize the histories, legacies, and positionalities of society that shaped contemporary institutional practice and its understanding of disability.
7. Candidates will explore and critique how inclusion has been operationalized and examine factors related to inclusion and exclusion.

Instructional Methods:


A variety of instructional methods will be employed to maximize student engagement and learning. Strategies include instructor- and student-guided discussion, text analysis and written reflection, direct instruction, project-based, and group collaborations. Instruction integrates theory and practice as it relates to curriculum development and evaluation, allowing students to demonstrate advanced ability to design, implement, and evaluate curriculum that promotes student learning.

Method of Evaluation:




  1. Historical and Cultural Timeline with Objective Commentary Paper




  1. Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary Paper (Key Assessment)




  1. Critical Analysis of Disability within Historical, Social, Political, or Cultural Product or Event




  1. Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments



V. Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
Resource Amount
Faculty

Other Personnel

Equipment

Supplies

Travel

New Books _500_____

New Journals 500

Other (Specify)


TOTAL
This course replaces an existing course. No funds are needed beyond library resources ($1000) to purchase books and support journal subscriptions.

Funding Required Beyond

Normal Departmental Growth

VI. COURSE MASTER FORM

This form will be completed by the requesting department and will be sent to the Office of the Registrar once the course has been approved by the Office of the President.

The form is required for all new courses.

DISCIPLINE Special Education


COURSE NUMBER INED 8335
COURSE TITLE FOR LABEL Special Ed Historical Perspect_________________
  (Note:  Limit 30 spaces)

CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS 3-0-3


Approval, Effective Term Summer 2014
Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U) Regular
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
Learning Support Programs courses which are

 required as prerequisites


APPROVED:

________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __
VII Attach Syllabus

(*Last day to withdraw w/o academic penalty: )




I. COURSE NUMBER: INED 8335

COURSE TITLE: Special Education from a Historical Perspective

COLLEGE OR SCHOOL: Bagwell College of Education

SEMESTER/TERM & YEAR: Summer 2014
II. INSTRUCTOR: Bessette, H. (Also, McHatton, P.; Brown, S.; Zimmer, K.)

TELEPHONE:

FAX:

E-MAIL:

OFFICE:
III. CLASS MEETINGS:
IV. TEXTS:

Required:
Danforth, S. (2009). The Incomplete Child (Disability Studies in Education) NY: Peter Lang.

Lipsky, D. K., & Gartner, A. (1989). Beyond Separate Education: Quality Education for All. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.

Winzer, M. A. (2009). A History of Special Education in the 20th Century: From Integration to Inclusion. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.

Recommended:

Kode, K., & Howard, K. (Editor). (2002). Elizabeth Farrell and the History of Special Education. Arlington, VA: Council Exceptional Children.


Osgood, R. L. (2007). The History of Special Education: A Struggle for Equality in American Public Schools. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Additional Readings provided in class.
V. CATALOG COURSE DESCRIPTION

This course addresses the historical evolution of educational services for individuals with disabilities within an ethic of justice framework. Critical analysis of the impact of events related to human rights and cross-cultural views of education and disability are emphasized. Candidates will examine ethical dilemmas from legal, theoretical, contextual and practical perspectives to expand their view of education as it applies to all students in diverse P-12 classrooms.


Pre-requisites: Admission to the EDD program in Special Education.
VI. PURPOSE/RATIONALE
Tracing the evolution of the field of special education and examining the histories, legacies, and positionalities that have contributed to the shaping of contemporary institutional practices in the field are crucial to understanding the work that must be done in the future to bring all learners to high levels of achievement. Equity and excellence for all learners may be our current democratic hope; but for those with disabilities, the historical journey has seldom represented a democratic pursuit.
Legislation and litigation in the mid-to-late twentieth century instigated a progression of new understandings about the way individuals with disabilities were perceived and valued then vs. today. The shift to a socio-cultural/social justice movement has significantly changed the landscape of special education, particularly the ideologies, philosophies, and practices that influence specially designed instruction to those with disabilities. Utilizing disability studies, among others, as frameworks for understanding the foundational role of deficit-thinking and benevolence which commonly depicted special education’ historical underpinnings (Ferri, 2008) is critical in our pursuit to forward asset-based thought in the field.
Course Objectives:


  1. Candidates will analyze the shifting social and cultural constructions of disability from pre-1700 through the early twentieth century and from the mid- twentieth century to current day by examining historical highlights.




  1. Candidates will explore the philosophies, principles, theories, laws and policies that were shaped by major federal legislation and litigation after 1960.




  1. Candidates will critique the historical, social and cross-cultural foundations that frame our response to disability today.




  1. Candidates will discuss the distinction between the study of special education and disability studies from a historical perspective on special education.




  1. Candidates will research cross-cultural understandings of disability from a historical perspective.




  1. Candidates will critique and summarize the histories, legacies, and positionalities of society that shaped contemporary institutional practice and its understanding of disability.




  1. Candidates will explore and critique how inclusion has been operationalized and examine factors related to inclusion and exclusion.

KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY’S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:

Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning and Leadership
Our vision as a nationally recognized Educator Preparation Program (EPP) is to remain at the forefront of educator preparation. Informed by responsive engagement in collaborative partnerships, we advance educational excellence through innovative teaching in an ever-changing global and digital learning environment. Our mission is to prepare educators to improve student learning within a collaborative teaching and learning community through innovative teaching, purposeful research, and engaged service. The essence of our vision and mission is captured in the theme Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning and Leadership which was adopted in 2002 to express concisely the fundamental approach to educator preparation at KSU.
The Educator Preparation Program (EPP) at Kennesaw State University is committed to developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers, teacher leaders and school leaders who possess the capability, intent and expertise to facilitate high levels of learning in all of their students through effective, research-based practices in classroom instruction, and to enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the EPP fosters the development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and leader. Within the EPP conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued development, not an end-state. To be effective, teachers and educational leaders must embrace the notion that teaching and learning are entwined and that only through the implementation of validated practices can all students construct meaning and reach high levels of learning. In that way, candidates are facilitators of the teaching and learning process. Finally, the EPP recognizes, values and demonstrates collaborative practices across the college and university and extends collaboration to the community-at-large. Through this collaboration with professionals in the university, local communities, public and private schools and school districts, parents and other professional partners, the EPP meets the ultimate goal of bringing all of Georgia’s students to high levels of learning.
Knowledge Base
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases: pre- service, induction, in-service, renewal (Odell, Huling, and Sweeny, 2000). Just as Sternberg (1996) believes that the concept of expertise is central to analyzing the teaching-learning process, the teacher education faculty at KSU believes that the concept of expertise is central to preparing effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during the continuum phases, teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward becoming Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that expertise is not an end-state but a process of continued development.
The knowledge base for methods of teaching students learning English continues to develop rapidly. Current directions include multiple intelligence models, content-based instruction, and L1/L2 approaches to teaching and learning. The field draws on research literature in the areas of second language acquisition, bilingualism and cognition, L1/L2 literacy, and social justice.

EPP Diversity Statement
The KSU Educator Preparation Provider (EPP) believes all learners are entitled to equitable educational opportunities. To that end, programs within the EPP consist of curricula, field experiences, and clinical practice that promote candidates’ development of knowledge, skills, and professional dispositions related to diversity identified in the unit’s conceptual framework, including the local community, Georgia, the nation, and the world. Curricula and applied experiences are based on well-developed knowledge foundations for, and conceptualizations of, diversity and inclusion so that candidates can apply them effectively in schools. Candidates learn to contextualize teaching and draw effectively on representations from the students’ own experiences and cultures. They learn to collaborate and engage with families in ways that value the resources, understandings, and knowledge that students bring from their home lives, communities and cultures as assets to enrich learning opportunities. Candidates maintain high expectations for all students (including English learners, students with exceptionalities and other historically marginalized and underrepresented students), and support student success through research-based culturally, linguistically, and socially relevant pedagogies and curricula.
Technology
Technology Standards & Use: Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission. Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master teacher preparation program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve student learning and meet Georgia Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses, candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore and use instructional media, especially microcomputers, to assist teaching. They will master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and use various software. Library research required in this course is supported by the Galileo system. D2L is a tool available to use for distance learning and will also be the primary mode of communication, especially in case of weather related notices regarding class. Course materials will be posted on D2L two to three weeks before they are discussed in class.
Theoretical Framework for the Ed.D. & Ed.S. in Teaching Field Majors


Learner

Informed pedagogical approaches arise from teachers’ critical understandings of Theoretical/Conceptual, Contextual, and Practical/Applied influences on the learner. The belief that all students can learn when the learner is the pedagogical core—promoted by Weimer (2002)—is the foundation of this program. Within this learner-centered conceptual framework, learners are embodied as P-16 students, pre-service candidates, teachers, teacher-leaders, and school and district leaders and administrators, all of whom engage in a coherent, learner-centered approach (Copland & Knapp, 2006). According to Lambert and McCombs (2000) and Alexander and Murphy (2000), the confluence of Practical, Contextual, and Conceptual Critical Understandings forms a lens for understanding Learner-Centered Psychological Principles.Within the Education and Research Core and the Teaching Field Pedagogy core courses, the candidates are introduced to key theories/concepts which are then examined according to the context of their teaching situation addressing issues of grade level, diversity, and school type. The assessments of the key theories/concepts in the courses, including formal and informal, are practical, which means the candidates apply the theories/concepts in a practical situation, such as a 7th grade science classroom.



VII. POLICIES:

ACADEMIC INTEGRITY

Every KSU student is responsible for upholding the provisions of the Student Code of Conduct, as published in the Undergraduate and Graduate Catalogs. Section II of the Student Code of Conduct addresses the University's policy on academic honesty, including provisions regarding plagiarism and cheating, unauthorized access to University materials, misrepresentation/falsification of University records or academic work, malicious removal, retention, or destruction of library materials, malicious/intentional misuse of computer facilities and/or services, and misuse of student identification cards. Incidents of alleged academic misconduct will be handled through the established procedures of the University Judiciary Program, which includes either an "informal" resolution by a faculty member, resulting in a grade adjustment, or a formal hearing procedure, which may subject a student to the Code of Conduct's minimum one semester suspension requirement.



ATTENDANCE POLICY

The expectations for attending class are in accordance with the Graduate Catalogue. Regular attendance is required for all scheduled classes in that the candidate is responsible for obtaining all materials, instruction, etc. presented during class. Attendance at all class meetings (face-to-face, synchronous, and asynchronous) is stressed because of the interactive nature of the class. As a community of learners we are diminished if any one of us is absent. Not all material covered will be found in the required readings. You are required to inform the instructor in advance of your absence. Attendance will be monitored and reflected in the class participation/attendance points (see KSU Graduate Catalog).



CANDIDATE EXPECTATIONS FOR ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION:

It is expected that candidates not only attend classes online and/or in person (face-to-face) depending on the delivery mode of the class, but also contribute to discussion boards thoroughly prepared. “Thoroughly prepared” is defined as having read the readings well enough to verbally and in writing state the definitions of terms from the readings; discuss ideas, notions, concepts, issues, and procedures in relation to previous information presented in class, online, or in previous readings; and apply the information from the readings to problems. It also implies the candidate has reviewed information from the previous class meetings. When information from the readings is unclear, the candidate should prepare questions to discuss in class. In addition, group members can ask candidates who are not contributing equally to the development of the presentation to be removed from their group.

Various cooperative learning group activities - in class and online - will enable candidates to apply new skills and knowledge. Each candidate has something unique to contribute to the class experience that will facilitate the learning of other class members. For full credit, candidates must demonstrate professionalism by:


  1. Participating fully in collaborative group work and focus groups

  2. Practicing active listening during presentations

  3. Refraining from working on other assignments during class presentations (or checking email)

All assignments must be submitted on or before the class meeting on the assigned due date. All grading will be done as objectively as possible. Rubrics will be provided for class presentations, postings, facilitation, and projects. In case of qualitative assessment, evaluation will be based on instructor judgment. Points will be cumulative and final course grades will be based on the percent of total points earned (i.e., A = 100 - 90%, B = 89 - 80%, etc.).


DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR

The University has a stringent policy and procedure for dealing with behavior that disrupts the learning environment. Consistent with the belief that your behavior can interrupt the learning of others, behavior that fits the University's definition of disruptive behavior will not be tolerated. Candidates should refer to the University Catalog to review this policy.



HUMAN RELATIONS

The University has formulated a policy on human relations that is intended to provide a learning environment that recognizes individual worth. That policy is found in the University Catalog. It is expected, in this class, that no Professional should need reminding but the policy is there for your consideration. The activities of this class will be conducted in both the spirit and the letter of that policy.



VIII. COURSE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this course are consistent with the

EPP Advanced Proficiencies, EDD/EDS program standards, and SPED EDD/EDS program standards.




EDD Performance Outcome

SPED EDD/EDS Objectives

Course Objective

Knowledge, Skills Dispositions

(Advanced CPI)

Activities, Coursework, Assignments & Key Assessment

  1. Candidates foster a responsive, learner-centered educational environment that promotes collaboration and democratic participation for student learning and may include co-teaching.

Candidates apply a critical lens to collaboration among key stakeholders to promote equitable practices within culturally responsive and sustaining educational contexts leading to improved outcomes for all learners.





2.1 (D)

2.2 (K;S;D)

2.3 (K;S)

2.4 (K;S)

2.5 (K;S)

2.6 (K;S)






  1. Candidates demonstrate pedagogical approaches which incorporate contextual, theoretical/conceptual, and practical influences on the learner and learning.




Candidates will discuss the distinction between the study of special education and disability studies from a historical perspective on special education.
Also:

Candidates will critique the historical, social and cross-cultural foundations that frame our response to disability today.



Also:

Candidates will explore the philosophies, principles, theories, laws and policies that were shaped by major federal legislation and litigation after 1960.



1.2 (K;S)

1.3 (K;S)

1.4 (K;S;D)

2.1 - 2.6 (K;S;D)




Historical and Cultural Timeline with Objective Commentary Paper
Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary Paper
Critical Analysis of Disability within Historical, Social, Political, or Cultural Product or Event
Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments


  1. Candidates advance teaching and learning through the innovative use of technology based on sound educational theory and knowledge of the learner.






1.2 (K;S)

2.1 – 2.6 (K;S;D)

2.4 (K;S)




  1. Candidates demonstrate in-depth foundational knowledge of content-based research, scholarship, and socio-political influences in the teaching field and use this knowledge to analyze and interpret problems and implement solutions within their profession.

Candidates demonstrate an understanding of how historical legacies, legislation, and litigation have served to both include and segregate students with disabilities and utilize this knowledge to serve as change agents within educational and community settings.


Candidates will analyze the shifting social and cultural constructions of disability from pre-1700 through the early twentieth century and from the mid- twentieth century to current day by examining historical highlights.
Also: Candidates will critique and summarize the histories, legacies, and positionalities of society that shaped contemporary institutional practice and its understanding of disability.

    1. (K)

    2. (K;S)

3.1 (K;D)

3.2 (K;D)

3.3 (D)

3.4 (D)


3.5 (D)


Historical and Cultural Timeline with Objective Commentary Paper
Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary Paper

(Assessment)


Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments


  1. Candidates demonstrate and apply various types of assessment to inform the learner’s ability to analyze, monitor, and improve their learning as well as interpret and use data to inform their own pedagogical effectiveness.






2.4 (K;S)

2.5 (K;S)

3.2 (K;D)




  1. Candidates engage in scholarly, applied research to advance knowledge of teaching, the learner, and/or learning.

Candidates engage in inquiry based learning as both consumer and producer of research. Drawing from theoretical and conceptual frameworks in educational research they apply these theories to their practice and develop alternative critical pedagogies to provide socially just schooling for all students.


Candidates will explore and critique how inclusion has been operationalized and examine factors related to inclusion and exclusion.

3.2 (K;D)

3.5 (D)


Critical Analysis of Disability within Historical, Social, Political, or Cultural Product or Event
Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments


  1. Candidates reflect on their professional, scholarly practice, and analyze the ways in which they have changed in their thinking, beliefs, or behaviors toward improved learner-centered practices.

Candidates are knowledgeable of critical issues within the field of special/education and engage in critical reflection, which involves taking an inquiry stance, relating theory to practice, stating an argument and supporting it with evidence, making comparisons and evaluating their own positionalities and epistemologies.





3.2 (K;D)




  1. Candidates support academic and linguistic needs of the learner, enhance cultural understandings, and increase global awareness of all students.

Candidates move beyond a culturally responsive framework by adopting a reflexive multicultural approach that validates and sustains the cultural identity of learners.


Candidates will research cross-cultural understandings of disability from a historical perspective.

1.4 (K;S;D)

2.1 – 2.6 (K;S;D)




Critical Analysis of Disability within Historical, Social, Political, or Cultural Product or Event
Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments


  1. Candidates demonstrate professional dispositions, fluency of academic language in a variety of contexts, , and ethical practice expected of an engaged scholar-practitioner.







1.4(K;D)

2.1 (D)


2.2 (K;S;D)

3.1 – 3.5 (K;D)








Candidates employ a critical lens to dismantle, reconfigure, and construct equitable educational institutions by identifying and challenging power and ideology in teaching practices, curricular materials, and education reform efforts.


Course Goals #2, #4, and #6








IX. COURSE REQUIREMENTS & ASSIGNMENTS


  1. Historical and Cultural Timeline with Objective Commentary Paper. You will construct a historical and cultural timeline that includes human rights legislation and litigation, as well as cultural and social constructs and political, legal, and ethical issues. You will also be required to write an objective commentary to accompany your timeline.

  2. Critical Analysis of Disability within Historical, Social, Political, or Cultural Product or Event. You will critically examine one historical, social, political, or cultural product or event that includes representation(s) of disability. You may draw on literature, research, media, documentaries, or artistic portrayals. Be sure to relate your analysis to course readings and sterling outside sources.

  3. Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary Paper. This assignment will reflect a history-in-person/self-context approach. It is similar to the Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary assignment; however, it will include your personal reflections and critique of major events within the timeline that have particular significance to your life. NOTE: This assignment is a Key Assessment within the program.

  4. Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments. You will periodically be assigned to reflect on assigned readings about past and present issues in special education from a historical perspective. You will review/reflect upon salient points of the work and the particular critical perspective which it elucidates. Author intent, as well as social, cultural, pedagogical, and ethical implications for diverse learners will be addressed.

X. EVALUATION & GRADING




Assignments/Assessments

Points

Historical and Cultural Timeline with Objective Commentary Paper

30

Critical Analysis of Disability within Historical, Social, Political, or Cultural Product or Event

30

Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary Paper

30

Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments

10

Total Points

100

Numeric Scale:

A = 90-100%

B = 80-89%

C = 70-79%

D = 60-69%

F = below 60

XII. COURSE OUTLINE
What follows is a tentative schedule (subject to change with notice). Course requirements and homework assignments are indicated on the chart below, but the weekly agendas will provide the specific due dates.

Class Session

Topic

Assignment/Reading for Next Week

Assignment Due



Welcome

Orientation to Course and Review of Syllabus

Looking at the Readings

Overview of Historical, Social and Cultural Foundations of Special Education










Shifting Social and Cultural Constructions of Disability: The Leading Gatekeepers

Danforth, The Incomplete Child. Ch. 1, 2, 4-6.

Winzer, A History of Special Education in the 20th Century: From Integration to Inclusion. Ch. 1-3.



Reflective Writing Assignment #1 Due



Histories, Legacies & Positionalities that Shaped Contemporary Practice/Discrimination Across the Lifespan

View Video - Bell, L.A. (2013). 40 Years Later…Now Can We Talk?

Outline for Historical & Cultural Timeline and Commentary Due



The Study of Disability and Disability Studies

Ferri, Reimagining Special Education from a Disability Studies Perspective.

Small and Large Group Reflections

Reflective Writing Assignment #2 Due





Beyond Separate Education

Lipsky & Gartner, Beyond Separate Education. Ch. 1-7.

Walberg, Wang & Reynolds: The Necessary Restructuring of Special Education.



Reflective Writing Assignment #3 Due



Major Transformations within General Education and Special Education

Winzer, A History of Special Education in the 20th Century: From Integration to Inclusion. Ch. 4-6.

Historical & Cultural Timeline and Commentary Due



Advocacy: Continuing to Break Down Barriers

Winzer, A History of Special Education in the 20th Century: From Integration to Inclusion. Ch. 7-9.

Lipsky & Gartner, Beyond Separate Education. Ch. 10-14



Reflective Writing Assignment #4 Due



Critical Analysis of Historical Perspectives

Mississippi Burning (excerpts)

Small and Large Group Reflection & Analysis

Outline for Critical Analysis Project Due





Critical Analysis of Historical Perspectives

Gloria Ladsen-Billings’ 2004 AERA Presidential Address, 50 Years Since Brown v. Board of Education

Reflective Writing Assignment #5 Due



Embracing an Inquiry Stance: Intersection of social class, ethnicity, race, academic & linguistic ability & gender

Cochran-Smith, Inside/outside (select chapters)

Outline for Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary Paper Due



Embracing an Inquiry Stance: Intersection of social class, ethnicity, race, academic & linguistic ability & gender

Starratt, Ethical Leadership (select chapters)

Critical Analysis Project Due



How Far Have We Really Come? The Overrepresentation of African American Males in Special Education

Guest Speaker

Small and Large Group Reflection & Analysis



Presentation of Personal Historical & Cultural Timelines

Final Presentations

Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline Due



Presentation of Personal Historical & Cultural Timelines

Final Presentations

Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline Commentary Paper Due





The database is protected by copyright ©essaydocs.org 2016
send message

    Main page