Educational Leadership, Learning and Curriculum Department Philosophy, Ethics, and Education, ED 5010

Transcription

1 Educational Leadership, Learning and Curriculum Department Philosophy, Ethics, and Education, ED 5010 Instructor: Hilary K. Swank Office Location: Rounds 025 (Note: temporary location is Lamson 204 until at least 8/15) Office and/or Online Availability: Office Hours by appointment or Online via . Office Phone: PSU Term and Year: Summer 2013 Course Delivery: Online in Moodle. This course is asynchronous students are expected to post assignments and respond to peers at least four times per week (at a very minimum). You will not be able to complete this course successfully if you cannot access and work on the course most days of the week. This course does not have regularly scheduled online meeting times, but students are expected to read posts daily. Students should review the syllabus to get an overview of the course. Most of the details for each unit are on the Moodle site. Students must check Moodle regularly and examine the links within each module. Catalog Description A study of the historical, philosophical, and social philosophical foundations of education. Emphasis placed upon the ideas of the classical, medieval, Enlightenment and post-enlightenment periods that have influenced types of American educational systems relative to their mission and purpose. Analysis of how these systems have defined ethics and the characteristics of the virtuous person. Course Overview While successfully completing this course, you will: Gain an appreciation of the interrelationships of ethics, philosophy, culture, and the purpose and content of education throughout history into the present day; Discuss some of the major controversial issues and areas of conflict in U.S. education, both historically and in the present day; Apply the philosophical foundations of education to the ideas and practices of the United States today; Examine and analyze ethical dilemmas in education using the Shapiro and Stefkovich model; Formulate a draft of your own philosophy of education Essential Questions: Who are the major philosophers contributing to our modern ways of thinking about education and what were/are their perspectives? What are the historical and philosophical foundations of educational ideas and practices in the United States today? What are some of the major contemporary issues in U.S. education? How can we make ethical decisions when education is so complicated? What is a philosophy of education? Textbook List/Bibliography/Recommended Reading/Resources ED5010 1

2 Required: Noll, James (2012). Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Educational Issues 17th Edition ISBN= OR ISBN= Shapiro, J.P. and Stefkovich, J.A. (2010 Third Edition). Ethical Leadership and Decision Making in Education: Applying Theoretical Perspectives to Complex Dilemmas. Routledge ISBN: Be sure to get the most recent edition as much has changed since the last one. Any other necessary articles and readings will be made available on Moodle or you will be asked to find them via online library resources or other public searches. Recommended (but not required) additional readings. Nel Noddings Ethics of Care. Article available at If you didn t take an undergraduate philosophy course or would like a refresher on the famous philosophers, their time periods and philosophies take a look at one of these: Gutek, G.L. (2001). Historical and Philosophical Foundations of Education: Selected Readings. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill/Prentice-Hall. Noddings, N. (2011). Philosophy of Education. Westview Press. Perry, M., Peden, J.R., Von Laue, T.H. (2006). Sources of the Western Tradition, Volume I: From Ancient Times to the Enlightenment, 6th ed. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin Company. Professional Standards, Course Goals/Objectives, and Assessment Assignment Persuasive Essay on Important Philosopher Contemporary Issues in Education Paper Ethics and Ethical Decision-Making: Smallgroup analysis of ethical dilemmas Contributions to discussion boards Educational Philosophy Assessment Tool Rubric Rubric Rubric Rubrics (Two different ones, depending on type) Self-Assessment in conference with instructor. Content of Course Which Addresses Technological Standards/Competence Students must engage with the Moodle software and online environment. Students must be competent in Word or another word-processing program, and be able to save documents as PDFs. Students must use their research skills to find reliable sources through the University s library or elsewhere. Evaluation Plan/Grading Scale All assignments combine to a total of 100 possible points. The final grade will be computed ED5010 2

3 as follows. Out of 100 points: A= A-=90-95 B+=87-89 B=84-86 B-=80-83 C+=77-79 C=74-76 C-=70-73 D=67-69 D-=64-66 F=below 64 Incompletes: An instructor may decide to enter a grade of incomplete (IC) on a student s record if unusual circumstances prevent completion of the course on time, and a minimal portion of the total class work needs to be completed. The course must be completed by the date specified by the instructor which cannot exceed one year beyond the original term of course completion. If the course is not completed by this date, the grade specified by the instructor will be recorded. If no grade is specified, a default grade of F will be recorded. The instructor is responsible for documenting and notifying the student of the work to be completed and the deadline. A student may not graduate with an incomplete on his or her transcript. Course Calendar/Agenda Course Calendar Preliminary Unit 7/1-7/8 Unit 1: Educational Philosophers throughout History 7/8-7/25 Unit 2: Contemporary Issues in Education 7/22-8/4 Unit 3: Ethics and Ethical Decision-Making in Education 8/2-8/18 Unit 4: Build Your Own Philosophy of Education 8/15-8/31 Introductions, brief writing assignment, comments on classmates writings. Educated Person Assignment due by midnight on 7/5 See Moodle site for unit details Persuasive Essay due 7/22 by midnight See Moodle site for unit details Contemporary Issues Paper due 8/1 by midnight See Moodle site for unit details. This unit has no individual paper. You will work in teams to analyze ethical dilemmas by 8/14 at midnight. See Moodle site for unit details. Your Philosophy of Education is due 8/26 by midnight. Assignment Details Preliminary Unit: Introductions and Introductory Assignment (5 points) ED5010 3

4 See unit materials on Moodle for detailed information and instructions. The purpose of this unit is to get to know your classmates, demonstrate your writing skills, and familiarize yourself with the course website and the syllabus. Unit 1: Philosophers Throughout History (30 points) See the unit materials on Moodle for detailed information and instructions. The purpose of this unit is to explore and learn about educational philosophers from five different time periods (Ancient, Medieval, Enlightenment, Post-Enlightenment, and Modern) In small groups you will explore philosophers from an assigned time period, determine who the top four from the period are, assign each group member one of the four, and then write a persuasive essay arguing why your philosopher deserves to be in the top four for your time period. See Moodle for instructions, etc. 10 points will be based on the quality of your small group discussion posts. 15 points will be based on your paper. 5 points will be based on your comments on and critiques of your peers essays. Unit 2: Contemporary Issues in Education (25 points) See the Unit 2 materials on Moodle for detailed assignment instructions. You will read the Noll book and discuss the various controversies in your small groups. Individually you will decide on what you consider to be the top three controversies and you will write a paper in which you provide a brief overview of each problem and the perspectives, you argue why each issue is important in education, you discuss at least one peer-reviewed source related to each of the issues you selected, and you explain what at least one philosopher you learned about in the last unit might have to say about your chosen issues. (You do not have to use the same philosopher for all three issues.) Your paper (15 points) will be graded based on the rubric provided. (See Moodle for detailed instructions.) Your contributions to your group s discussion will account for 5 points, and your final 5 points come from your thoughtful critiques of and comments on your peers papers. Unit 3: Ethics and Ethical Decision-Making in Education (20 points) See the Unit 3 materials on Moodle for detailed assignment instructions. In this unit you will work in small groups to apply the model presented in Shapiro and Stefkovich. You will discuss the model itself to be sure that you all understand it. Then you will work to apply the model to the ethical dilemmas in your assigned chapter. You should read the entire book so that you will be able to comment on and critique the work of other groups. Your group will be graded on its final analysis of the assigned dilemmas based on the rubric provided in this syllabus and in the section of the Moodle page on this unit. For this unit, 15 points will be based on the group s work analyzing the dilemmas and applying the models. The other 5 points will be for the quality of your individual posts in which you comment on and critique at least two other group s analyses. ED5010 4

5 Unit 4: Craft your own Philosophy of Education (20 points) See the Unit 4 materials on Moodle for detailed information on assignments. Carefully read and consider Chapter 11 in Shapiro and Stefkovich and examine your own views on education. Consider some of the key ideas you have read and written about throughout this course and craft your own personal education philosophy statement. It should be 5-6 pages long. We will establish through discussion what you should include in your statement. After we have determined what belongs in a philosophy of education, you will craft your own philosophy and write a short statement (not included in the page limit) reflecting on your work and assigning yourself a grade for the paper. If, for any reason, I disagree with your self-assessment, we will discuss it and come to an agreement. Five (5) points of your grade are for the discussion, your Philosophy statement counts for 10 points, and your contributions to the discussions count for the other 5 points. Conceptual Framework PSU College of Graduate Studies Program Hallmarks Leadership and Advocacy Reflection and Innovation Scholarship and Application Professionalism and Service Global Awareness and Social Responsibility University Policies and Procedures ADA Policy: Plymouth State University is committed to providing students with documented disabilities equal access to all university programs and facilities. If you think you have a disability requiring accommodations, you should contact the PASS office in Lamson library ( ) to determine whether you are eligible for such accommodations. Academic accommodations will only be considered for students who have registered with the PASS Office. If you have a Letter of Academic Accommodation for this course from the PASS office, please provide the instructor with that information privately so that adaptations can be made to meet your needs. Course materials online comply with the Web-based Intranet and Internet Information and Applications Standards in accordance with ADA Section 508. Academic Integrity: Academic integrity is the foundation of the pursuit of knowledge. All members of the academic community are expected to be dedicated to the pursuit of knowledge in an honest, responsible, respectful, and ethical manner. Every violation of academic integrity is an affront to the academic community. Violations of academic integrity make fair evaluation impossible and cast doubt upon the seriousness with which students accept the responsibility of acquiring an education. Members of the academic community are expected to report all instances of those violations of academic integrity that come to their attention. Both faculty and ED5010 5

6 administration consider it their duty, as guardians of academic standards and intellectual honesty, to enforce the academic integrity policy by prosecuting all cases of violation of academic integrity to the fullest extent. Students are urged to consider that it is the toleration of violations of academic integrity, and not the reporting of it that is dishonorable. Please refer to the Graduate Catalog for more information and the entire policy. Sensitive Materials: Material in this course, in some instances, may be sensitive or emotionally provocative. As you review the syllabus, or at any time during the course, please let your instructor know if you anticipate, or are having, a problem with any assignment or classroom activity. We can then discuss how this assignment or activity is necessary for meeting course competencies and whether an alternative assignment or activity can be considered. We can also discuss campus resources that you may find helpful in dealing with your concerns. Plymouth State University Curtailed Operations Information: Plymouth State University normally remains open through inclement weather. Because most students live within minutes of the campus, every effort is made to avoid an official closing. There may be times, however, when an emergency or extreme weather conditions necessitate a general closing of the University. Please sign up for PSU Alert Emergency Text Messaging at: plymouth.edu/alerts Following are the PSU curtailed operations and/or class cancellation notification procedures: In the event of severe weather or an emergency, the University Administration will do all it can to decide on and post notifications of class/event cancellations and/or facility closures by 6:00 a.m. for classes running during the day. For canceling evening classes, the decision is usually made and communicated no later than 3:00 p.m. Every effort will be made to make the decision as early as possible. If you are wondering, call the storm line ( ) or check the PSU website. Use your own judgment about travel during inclement weather; the best choice is the one that keeps you safe. Notify your instructor(s) if you have to miss a class. Lamson Library and Learning Commons Access to the IT Help Desk is available at Log in to MyPlymouth to access all of the Lamson Library and Learning Common resources and services. The Wrting Center and the PASS office are located in the lower level of Lamson; the Help Desk in on the Main Floor. ED5010 6

7 Assessment Rubrics Persuasive Essay: Criteria 8= A (Good) 7= B (Adequate) 6= C Essay is Persuasive Quality/Use of Evidence Writing and Sources Compariso n to other thinkers of time period Links to Today Essay has a clear thesis or argument, and is written in a persuasive style. The author provides sufficient evidence to make a compelling argument and uses it well to support the argument. The paper is clearly organized, contains few or no grammatical or typographical errors, and has the at least 5 sources that are well defended (plus a reference list in APA format) The paper compares the chosen philosopher to others of the time in order to demonstrate his/her importance. The paper provides compelling evidence that the chosen philosopher has an influence (direct or indirect) even now in terms of modern educational thought or practice. By the end of the essay the argument is clear. The paper is sometimes written in a persuasive style and is sometimes more expository. The author provides sufficient evidence to make a compelling argument OR uses evidence well to support the argument OR author provides some evidence and sometimes uses it well to support the argument. The paper does not fully meet all requirements (e.g., some grammatical errors that do not interfere with meaning) but mostly meets all three. The paper either compares chosen philosopher to others of the time but does not use the information to demonstrate chosen philosopher s importance OR provides little information about other philosophers of the time to demonstrate importance of chosen philosopher The paper indicates some ways in which the philosopher may have influences that remain today but provides insufficient evidence. (Unsatisfactory) The paper does not have a clear argument or persuasive purpose. The paper is not written in a persuasive style. The author lacks sufficient evidence to make a compelling argument and/or fails to use evidence in a way that supports the argument. The paper meets two of the three requirements fully or partially meets all three. The paper only mentions the ideas of other philosophers and/or does not use the information to demonstrate chosen philosopher s importance. The paper makes few connections between the chosen philosophers ideas and today s educational thought or practice. 5-0 = D-F Paper lacks a clear purpose and is not persuasive OR no paper turned in. Paper has little or no supporting evidence. Paper uses poor quality evidence. Evidence not used to support argument. Paper meets one or none of the three criteria or partially meets only one or two of the requirements. The paper makes little or no mention of other thinkers of the time. No connections to present day educational thought or practice. ED5010 7

8 Contemporary Issues Paper: Criteria 8= A (Good) 7= B (Adequate) 6= C (Unsatisfactory) 5-0 = D-F Writing and Sources Overview and importance of three issues Use of outside sources Links to philosophers ideas The paper is clearly organized, contains few or no grammatical or typographical errors, and has at least 5 sources (Noll book plus three peer-reviewed, plus at least one source on philosopher) with APA reference list. Paper has a brief, thorough overview of three issues and clearly argues the importance of each. Paper has three highly related articles (one for each issue) that are clearly linked to the chosen issues and which are discussed in detail. Paper clearly links one philosopher to each of the three chosen issues and provides evidence to support arguments. The paper does not fully meet all requirements (e.g., some grammatical errors that do not interfere with meaning) but mostly meets all three. Paper has incomplete (or excessively long) overview of three issues and/or attempts to argue importance. Paper does not fully meet all three requirements (e.g., one article is not highly related to chosen issue). Paper relates one philosopher to each of the three chosen issues but does not do so accurately or clearly OR paper does not have strong evidence to support arguments. The paper meets two of the three requirements fully OR partially meets all three. Paper does not give overview of the three issues and/or does not argue importance Paper meets two of the three requirements fully OR partially meets all three. Paper neither clearly and accurately relates one philosopher to each issue nor uses strong evidence to support arguments. Paper meets one or none of the three criteria or partially meets only one or two of the requirements. Paper does not discuss three issues or does not provide any overviews and fails to argue the importance of each Paper meets one or none of the three criteria or partially meets only one or two of the requirements. Paper does not relate 1 philosopher to each issue AND/OR paper does not use evidence to support arguments ED5010 8

9 Analysis of Ethical Dilemmas: Criteria 8= A (Good) 7= B (Adequate) 6= C (Unsatisfactory) 5-0 = D-F Quality of Posts (weighted double) Posts do not fully meet all requirements (e.g., posts usually make use of ethical problemsolving model) but mostly meet Posts meet three of the four requirements fully OR partially meet all four. all four. Accurate Interpretation of the Ethical Problemsolving model. (weighted double) Use of personal or professional experience to analyze dilemmas Posts are clearly organized, contain few or no grammatical or typographical errors, are directly relevant to analyses, and contribute substantively to group effort to apply the ethical problem-solving model. Posts demonstrate accurate understanding, interpretation, and application of the Ethical Problem-solving model. Posts draw on personal or professional experience (not all the time, but when useful) to support or inform analyses. Posts demonstrate adequate, but not complete understanding, interpretation, and application of the Ethical Problem-solving model. Posts occasionally draw on personal or professional experience to support or inform analyses OR personal or professional anecdotes are not clearly related to analyses. Posts demonstrate some, though inadequate, understanding, interpretation, and application of the Ethical Problem-solving model. Posts rarely draw on personal or professional experience to support or inform analyses OR personal or professional anecdotes seem unrelated to analyses. Posts meet two or fewer of the four criteria or partially meet only two or three of the requirements. Posts demonstrate little or no understanding, interpretation, or application of the Ethical Problemsolving model. Posts do not draw on personal or professional experience to support or inform analyses OR personal or professional anecdotes provided are not related to analysis. ED5010 9

10 Quality of comments/critiques of peers work: Criteria 8= A (Good) 7= B (Adequate) 6= C (Unsatisfactory) 5-0 = D-F Quality of Posts Quality of feedback Posts are clearly organized, contain few or no grammatical or typographical errors, are directly relevant and contribute substantively to discussion. Posts provide constructive feedback, both positive and negative on peers work. Posts are thoughtful, relevant, respectful and useful. Posts do not fully meet all requirements (e.g., posts are usually directly relevant) but mostly meet all four. Posts provide constructive feedback, both positive and negative on peers work but the feedback may occasionally show carelessness, lack relevance, or be somewhat vague. Posts meet three of the four requirements fully OR partially meet all four. Posts provide positive and negative feedback on peers work but the feedback is only sometimes thoughtful, relevant, or useful. Posts meet two or fewer of the four criteria or partially meet only two or three of the requirements. Posts contain one or more disrespectful comments. Posts do not provide constructive feedback (pos. or neg.) that is useful, thoughtful or relevant. Quality of contributions to discussions not otherwise graded: Criteria 8= A (Good) 7= B (Adequate) 6= C (Unsatisfactory) 5-0 = D-F Quality of Posts Posts are clearly organized, contain few or no grammatical or typographical errors, are directly relevant, and contribute substantively to discussion or problem-solving Posts do not fully meet all requirements (e.g., posts are usually directly relevant) but mostly meet all four. Posts meet three of the four requirements fully OR partially meet all four. Posts meet two or fewer of the four criteria or partially meet only two or three of the requirements. ED