Eastern Connecticut State University

Dr. Richard Reynolds Home Page

EDU 570

Eastern ConnecticutStateUniversity

Education Department

Capstone Seminar - EDU 570.02

Summer, 2005

Instructor: Dr. Richard Reynolds Class hours: M/W; 4:00–7.20 pm.

Office: Webb 152 Classroom: Webb 215

Office hours: before class or by appointment

Phone: 465–5323 (W) 423-5329 (H) Email: Reynolds@easternct.edu

_____________________________________________________________________________

Purpose of the course

As the culminating graduate course in Education, the Capstone Seminar is designed to provide a forum for analysis and exploration of current issues and topics in the field. Additionally, the seminar provides opportunities for ongoing reflection and integration of theoretical and experiential knowledge in order to gain an informed, personalized perspective on the practice of education.

Course objectives

By the end of the course the student will:

demonstrate graduate level competence in reading, writing, public presentations, and both independent and collaborative learning;
demonstrate graduate level knowledge of and the ability to think critically about current issues and topics in education;
demonstrate a professional understanding of the impact of current trends and theoretical perspectives on classroom practice and teaching/learning outcomes;
demonstrate competence in the professional skills of analysis and reflection, collaborative problem-solving, self-evaluation, and planning for ongoing growth in the field of education.

All of these course objectives are interconnected with the ECSU Education Unit Conceptual Framework. The core theme of the conceptual framework is constructivist, learner-centered epistemology with emphasis on inquiry, reflection and collaboration. Surrounding this core are six critical strands-- content knowledge, pedagogical knowledge, integration of knowledge, infusion of educational technology, diversity, and professionalism. Students in Capstone Seminar are expected to demonstrate competencies related to the unit conceptual framework through their papers and appendices (the documentation of materials in support of their paper).

Student evaluation*

* All writing assignments should be typed, double spaced with one inch margins all around.

Rubrics for evaluating all the assignments are attached. See those rubrics for details.

Attendance, participation, and dispositions [15%]

Following a seminar format, the course requires students to complete assigned readings in advance of each class and to join actively in debate, discussion, analysis, and reflection. Each member of the class is essential to the development of a learning community and, as such, regular attendance is expected of all students.

At the end of this course, you must submit a 2-3 page reflection describing your strengths and challenges with respect to target or acceptable dispositions as explained in the attached rubric. Grades will be determined by carefully comparing your reflection with my notes. Although you will write your disposition reflection at the end of the course, you will have opportunities to demonstrate required dispositions throughout this course. If needed, meetings will be conducted with individual student(s) to discuss how dispositions can be improved.

Philosophy of Education [15%]

Write a two-page statement of your philosophy of education. Specifically write your goals of the subject matter you are teaching or would like to teach and the roles of students and the teacher in the learning process. You have to first submit a draft of your philosophy for the instructor's feedback. In the final version of your philosophy, you must include the first draft as an appendix.

Critical incidents [10%]

Each student will be asked to relate an incident that occurred within their schools and or classrooms to the seminar group for analysis, reflection, and discussion. It is important that each student carefully selects a topic that relates to class readings or presents a moral/ethical dilemma so that we may enjoy a lively discussion.

Reflection papers [320 = 60%]

Three brief reflection papers (each paper 5 pages long) on the following topics are required:

1) The mission of schools and parent/community involvement. What are your goals of education and what roles do parents and families play in achieving your goals?

2) Diversity in the classroom. What are the impacts of different kinds of diversities such as students’ culture, gender, special needs, and socioeconomic status in achieving your goals of education? How would you address these issues in your classroom?

3) Teacher qualities/Methods of teaching. What are the most important qualities that a teacher should possess? How do these qualities relate to your method of teaching? Choose a particular learning theory (or theories) and show how the teacher qualities and methods of teaching you advocate are consistent with the theory you have chosen.

N.B. All reflection papers including your philosophy of education assignment require at least five different sources of citations and/or quotations.

Evaluation Criteria

Each paper must synthesize relevant readings from class as well as information gained from course work at Eastern. Classroom and teaching experiences should also be incorporated into the papers to support main points. The American Psychological Association (APA) format must be used for citations in the text as well as the reference section of the paper (See attached rubrics for details).

Capstone Seminar students will utilize small collaborative, discussion groups to synthesize readings from coursework. In-class time will be provided for these discussions. The papers, however, are to be completed individually.

Grading

Final grades for this course will be determined on total points earned out of 100 according to the following scale:

94% -100% A 78% - 81% B- 64% - 65% D+

90% - 93% A- 74% - 77% C+ 62% - 63% D

86% - 89% B+ 70% - 73% C Below 62% F

82% - 85% B 66% - 69% C-

Please pick up your final paper in my office, Webb 152, during the first three weeks of the fall semester. If you cannot pick up your paper within the time frame, please include a self addressed stamped envelope for mailing

Students with Disabilities.

If you are a student with a disability and believe you will need accommodations for this class, it is your responsibility to contact the Office of AccessAbility Services at (860) 465-5573. To avoid any delay in the receipt of accommodations, you should contact the Office of AccessAbility Services as soon as possible. Please understand that I cannot provide accommodations based upon disability until I have received an accommodation letter from the Office of AccessAbility Services. Your cooperation is appreciated.

Course Texts

Costantino, P. M., & DeLorenzo, M. N. (2002). Developing a professional teaching portfolio: A guide for success. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Cuban, L. (2003). Why is it so hard to get good schools? New York: Teachers College Press.

Kozol, J. (2000). Ordinary resurrections: Children in the years of hope. New York: Crown Publishers.

Articles to read

Abbott, J., & Ryan, T. (1999). Constructing knowledge: Reconstructing schooling, Educational Leadership, 57(3), 66-69.

Ackerman, D. B. (2003). Taproots for a new century: Tapping the best of traditional and progressive education. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(5), 344-349.

Banks, J. A. (1996). The canon debate, knowledge construction, and multicultural education. In F. Schultz (Ed.), Education 96/97 (pp. 163–173). Guilford, CT: Dushkin Publishing Group.

Bell, L. I. (2003). Strategies that close the gap. Educational Leadership, 60(4), 32-34.

Bullock, M. (2002). A systems approach to the provision of services to individuals with disabilities. Educational Horizons, 81(1), 21-26.

Brooks, M. G., & Brooks, J. G. (1999). The courage to be constructivist. Educational Leadership, 57(3), 18-24.

Brophy, J. (1992). Probing the subtleties of subject-matter teaching. Educational Leadership, 49(7), 4–8.

Caine, G., Caine, R. N., & McClintic, C. (2002). Guiding the innate constructivist. Educational Leadership, 60(1), 70-73.

Campbell, L. (1997). How teachers interpret MI theory. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 14-19.

Cavarretta, J. (1998). Parents are a school's best friends. Educational Leadership, 55(8), 12-15.

Checkley, K. (1997). The first seven and the eighth: A conversation with Howard Gardner. Educational Leadership, 55(1), 8-13.

Checkley, K. (1996). Geography and gender bias. Curriculum update, Spring 1996, 4.

Clabaugh, G. K. (2002). The Cutting Edge: What’s “special” about special education. Educational Horizons, 81(1), 6-7.

Corbett, D., & Wilson, B. (2002). What urban students say about good teaching. Educational Leadership, 60(1), 18-22.

Dewey, J. (1995/1916). Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education. In F. Schultz (Ed.), Sources: Notable selections in education (pp. 20–25). Guilford, CT: Dushkin Publishing Group. (Reprinted from Democracy and education: An introduction to the philosophy of education, by J. Dewey, 1916, New York: MacMillan).

Friedman, L. (2003). Promoting opportunity after school. Educational Leadership, 60(4), 79-82.

Fullan, M. G. (1993). Why teachers must become change agents. Educational Leadership, 50(6), 12–17.

Futrell, M. H., Gomez, J., & Bedden, D. (2003). Teaching the children of a new America: The challenge of diversity. Phi Delta Kappan, 84(5), 381-385.

Giannetti, C. C., & Sagarese, M. M. (1998). Turning parents from critics to allies. Educational Leadership, 55(8), 40-42.

Hebert, E. A. (1998). Lessons learned about student portfolios. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(8), 583-585.

Hodgkinson, H. (2002). Demographics and teacher education: An overview. Journal of Teacher Education, 53(2), 102-105.

Hurst, B., Wilson, C., & Cramer, G. (1998). Professional teaching portfolios: Tools for reflection, growth, and advancement. Phi Delta Kappan, 79(8), 578-582.

Jobe, D. A. (2003). Helping girls succeed. Educational Leadership, 60(4), 64-66.

Leinhardt, G. (1992). What research on learning tells us about teaching. Educational Leadership, 49(7), 20–25.

McCombs-Tolis, J. (2002). Serving students with disabilities via individualized education plan (IEP) meetings: Employing a self-organizing systems perspective as a philosophical agent of change. Educational Horizons, 81(1), 33-37.

Meier, D. (1995). How our schools could be. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(5), 369–373.

Nieto, S. M. (2003). Profoundly multicultural questions. Educational Leadership, 60(4), 6-10.

Noddings, N. (1995). A morally defensible mission for schools in the 21st century. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(5), 365–368.

Perkins, D. (1999). The many faces of constructivism. Educational Leadership, 57(3), 6-11.

Rich, D. (1998). What parents want from teachers. Educational Leadership, 55(8), 37-39.

Rolón, C. A. (2003). Educating Latino students. Educational Leadership, 60(4), 40-43.

Sadker, D. (1999). Gender equity: Still knocking at the classroom door. Educational Leadership, 56(7), 22-26.

Scherer, M. (1993). On Savage inequalities: A conversation with Jonathan Kozol. Educational Leadership, 50(4), 4–9.

Shanker, A. (1995). Full inclusion is neither free nor appropriate. Educational Leadership, 52(4), 18–21.

Sirotnik, K. A. (1998). What goes on in classrooms? Is this the way we want it? In L. E. Beyer & M. W. Apple (Eds.), The curriculum: Problems, politics, and possibilities (2nd ed.) (pp. 58–76). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.

Stager, G. (2000, September). Jonathan Kozol speaks out. Curriculum Administrator, 33-36.

Taylor, D., & Lorimer, M. (2003). Helping boys succeed. Educational Leadership, 60(4), 68-70.

Tomlinson, C. A. (2002). Invitation to learn. Educational Leadership, 60(1), 6-10.

Van Dyke, R., Stallings, M. A., & Colley, K. (1995). How to build an inclusive school community: A success story. Phi Delta Kappan, 76(6), 475–479.

Van Wagenen, L., & Hibbard, K. M. (1998). Building teacher portfolios. Educational Leadership, 55(5), 26-29.

Course Schedule

Session	Readings/Assignments
May 23	Course Introduction Personal beliefs and philosophy of education. Review of previous Eastern courses
May 25	School problems/reforms Ackerman, 2003; Futrell, Gomez, & Bedden, 2003; Hodgkinson, 2002; Sirotnik, 1998 Further discussion of your philosophy statement
May 30	Memorial Day Holiday No classes
June 1	Why is it so hard to get good schools? Cuban (2003) Parent/Community Involvement in Education Cavarretta, 1998; Giannetti & Sagarese, 1998; Rich, 1998 Draft philosophy due
June 3 make-up class	The mission of schools Dewey, 1995; Meier, 1995; Noddings, 1999
June 6	Teaching and assessing students’ growth of understanding/ Portfolio Evaluation Costantino & DeLorenzo, 2002; Hebert, 1998; Hurst, Wilson, & Cramer, 1998; Van Wagenen & Hibbard, 1998 Critical Incidents/Case Presentations Final philosophy due
June 8	Portfolio Evaluation continued Critical Incidents/Case Presentations
June 13	Cultural/Gender diversity Banks, 1996; Checkley, 1996; Jobe, 2003; Rolón, 2003; Sadker, 1999; Taylor & Lorimer, 2003 Critical Incidents/Case Presentations Paper #1 due
June 15	Students with special needs/Tracking Bullock, 2002; Clabaugh, 2002; McCombs-Tolis, 2002; Shanker, 1995; Van Dyke, Stallings, & Colley, 1995 Critical Incidents/Case Presentations
June 20	Ordinary Resurrections Kozol, 2000 Friedman, 2003; Nieto, 2003; Scherer, 1993; Stager, 2000 Critical Incidents/Case Presentations Paper #2 due
June 22	Constructivist view of learning and multiple intelligences Abbott & Ryan, 1999; Brooks & Brooks, 1999; Caine, Caine, & McClintic, 2002; Campbell, 1997; Checkley, 1997; Fullan, 1993; Perkins, 1999 Critical Incidents/Case Presentations
June 27	Constructivist view of learning and good teaching Bell, 2003; Brophy, 1992; Corbett & Wilson, 2002; Leinhardt, 1992; Tomlinson, 2002
June 29	Concluding Session Disposition Reflection Due Paper #3 due

Philosophy Rubric (15 points)

	Target (5)	Acceptable (3-4)	Unacceptable (0-2)
Logic and clarity	The philosophy statements are direct, straightforward, and unambiguous. The paper consists of well-defined and clearly developed paragraphs which are consistent and logically connected to each other maintaining the flow of the paper. It is well focused.	The philosophy statements are generally clear but sometimes ambiguous. The paper consists of clearly developed paragraphs that are logically connected to each other maintaining the flow of the paper. It is focused.	The philosophy statements are unclear and ambiguous. The paper does not consist of well-defined and clearly developed paragraphs. It does not maintain the flow of the paper. It is not focused.
Connections to classrooms	The statements are supported by meaningful examples and illustrations from classroom and/or personal experiences.	The statements are supported by examples from classroom and/or personal experiences.	The statements are not supported by examples from classroom and/or personal experiences.
Readings, citations, and formatting	The philosophy statements are based on critical reflection of course readings. The paper follows proper APA formatting consistently. It has no grammar and spelling errors.	The philosophy statements are based on reflection of course readings. The paper follows APA formatting. It has minor grammar and spelling errors.	The philosophy statements are not based on reflection of course readings. The paper does not follow proper APA formatting. It has several grammar and spelling errors.

Disposition Rubric (15 points)

	Target (5)	Acceptable (3-4)	Unacceptable (0-2)
Class participation	Attended every class or missed one, always came on time, submitted all assignments by their due dates, was not distracted, and was actively engaged in group and whole class activities.	Missed two or three classes, almost always came on time, submitted all assignments by their due dates, was not distracted, and was actively engaged in group and whole class activities.	Missed more than 3 classes, often came late, and/or was inactive or distracted in group/whole class activities.
Professionalism	Read professional and research journal(s) in their discipline(s) to improve their own personal and professional growth, sought membership of professional organization(s) to become involved in the professional community of educators, and demonstrated passion and enthusiasm for their discipline(s) and methods of teaching.	Read professional and research journal(s) in their discipline(s) and demonstrated some passion and enthusiasm for their discipline(s) and methods of teaching.	Did not read professional and research journal(s) in their discipline(s) and/or did not demonstrate passion and enthusiasm for their discipline(s) and methods of teaching.
Respect	Displayed professional and ethical behavior in the class, always paid attention and listened to peers and the instructor of the class with respect, and often responded thoughtfully and appropriately to the ideas of peers and the instructor.	Displayed professional and ethical behavior in the class, and always paid attention and listened to peers and the instructor of the class with respect.	Did not display professional and ethical behavior in the class and/or did not pay attention to the ideas of peers and the instructor of the class.

Rubric for Reflection Papers (20´3=60 points )

	Target (5)	Acceptable (3-4)	Unacceptable (0-2)
Logic and clarity	The paper is direct, straightforward, and unambiguous. The paper consists of well defined and clearly developed paragraphs which are consistent and logically connected to each other maintaining the flow of the paper. It is well focused. The conclusion is well substantiated by both theory and practice	The paper is generally clear but sometimes ambiguous. The paper consists of clearly developed paragraphs which are logically connected to each other maintaining the flow of the paper. It is focused. The conclusion is substantiated by both theory and practice	The paper is unclear and ambiguous. The paper does not consist of well defined and clearly developed paragraphs. It does not maintain the flow of the paper. It is not focused. The conclusion is not clear.
Connections to Readings and classrooms	The paper is based on critical reflection of course readings (at least five). Relevant references have been effectively used. The paper is supported by meaningful examples and illustrations from classroom and/or personal experiences. It cites all relevant previous courses taken at Eastern.	The paper is based on reflection of course readings (at least four). Relevant references have been used. The paper is supported by examples from classroom and/or personal experiences. It cites some relevant previous courses taken at Eastern.	The paper does not cite course readings. Relevant references have not been used. The paper is not supported by examples from classroom and/or personal experiences. It does not cite previous courses taken at Eastern.
Quality of Appendices	The paper has sufficient documentation (appendices) to support writing. The documents such as classroom photographs, student work, excerpts from lesson and unit plans are clear and meaningful. They are well connected to the paper. Each document consists of clear, logical, and meaningful captions.	The paper has documentation (appendices) to support writing. The documents such as student works, excerpt from lesson and unit plans are clear. They are connected to the paper. Each document consists of clear captions.	The paper lacks documentation (appendices). The captions are not clear.
Formatting, grammar, syntax, spelling.	The paper follows proper APA formatting consistently. It has no grammar, syntax and spelling errors.	The paper follows APA formatting. It has minor grammar, syntax and spelling errors.	The paper does not follow proper APA formatting. It has several grammar, syntax and spelling errors.

lity to contact the Office of AccessAbility Services at (860) 465-5573. To avoid any delay in the receipt of accommodations, you should contact the Office of AccessAbility Services as soon as possible. Please understand that I cannot provide accommodations based upon disability until I have received an accommodation letter from the Office of AccessAbility Services. Your cooperation is appreciated.