Required readings: Bruner, J. (1977) The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (available at the bookstore). Additional readings in packet on reserve at Odegaard Undergraduate Library and at the receptionist's desk in 322 Miller. This syllabus is available on the web at http://faculty.washington.edu/sunolen/501/501syl.html, or follow the EDPSY 501 link from Nolen's home page: http://faculty.washington.edu/sunolen/
Table of Contents
A second major goal of the course is to assist you in developing your
scholarly writing skills. Scholarly writing entails the ability to critically
review the work of others, find connections among ideas emanating from
different points of view, and clearly express and justify your own thoughts
on a topic. The written assignments in the course, and the feedback you
receive from me and from your peers, will provide opportunities for development
of these abilities.
The majority of class time will be spent in small- and large-group discussion of your reactions to points of view and supporting evidence in the assigned readings, and their relationships to the theories we have discussed and to your own experiences in teaching and learning situations. You are expected to have read all assigned material before coming to class; the nature of class activities will be based on this expectation.
The purpose of discussion in this course is to critically examine your views and the views of others, and to develop and your own position on the nature of learning and educational practice. We will, by challenging your assertions, try to help you focus on the assumptions that underlie them, and your warrant for making them. I hope that these oral discussions will sharpen your ability to discuss and defend a position in your term project.
WRITTEN ASSIGNMENTS AND GRADING
Your course grade will be determined by your performance on written assignments. Short Thematic Papers 1 & 2 may be revised and resubmitted up to November 29. Term Projects will receive detailed feedback on rough drafts (the more complete the draft, the more detailed the feedback). Term Projects handed in early (by December 3) may be revised and resubmitted.
There will be two kinds of written assignments:
1. Short Thematic Papers (STPs). You will write three short papers during the course of the quarter, detailing your thinking on the content of the course. These papers will critically explore common themes in the readings and class discussions, discuss contrasting points of view, and relate these to your own ideas and experiences. These are not to be mere summaries of the readings and discussions. I encourage you to relate these themes to your project topic, using the thought papers to work through or try out various approaches to your projects. The second and third papers must also make some connections with themes discussed in previous papers. For samples of previous students' STPs, click here.
Thought papers will be graded acceptable(check)/unacceptable(no check). I will provide helpful written feedback, both on the content of your thinking and on your written expression. I also encourage you to discuss your work individually with me throughout the quarter, and well as with your fellow students. Unacceptable papers should be resubmitted following revision, accompanied by the original version. You must submit at least two acceptable thought papers. Two acceptable papers = 2.7; three acceptable papers = 4.0.
Specifications: 3-4 pages (really!), 12-point type, 1" margins, double spaced, stapled. STP 1 covers all readings from Thorndike (1910) through Brown (1992). STP 2 covers all readings from Elikind (1973) through Bruer (1993). STP 3 covers all readings from Dyson (1995) through Nolen (1995).
Check: Paper has a central theme or argument that relates to all of the readings, readings are discussed critically as they relate to the central theme or argument, your position/views on this theme/argument are clear and supported by readings and/or personal experience and/or logic. STP 2 and 3 make a connection back to previous readings from the course. Not more than 4 pages.
No Check: Paper is largely summaries or doesn't deal in some way with all readings, or is mostly a list of reactions to individual readings done athematically. Exceeds 4 pages.
2.Term Project. As your project for the term, you will explore an educational issue that is of particular interest to you, and which you will address using theories discussed in the course. The project will center around a question that you ask and attempt to answer in your paper. You will argue your position (your view of the answer to the question) with support from (a) relevant course readings, (b) outside readings in the specific area, and (c) your own logical thinking. Some questions are unanswerable, at least at present: Your paper may take and support that position as well.
The paper may take a number of forms. If you are interested in teaching, say, reading comprehension, you might ask the question, "Should I change the approach I use to teach reading? Why or why not?" Students studying to be principals or other leaders may want to ask about the merits of various approaches to staff development or autonomy. Those who are interested in conducting research might want to do a critical literature review on a topic, using a theoretical framework discussed or developed in this course, and suggesting areas for future research. You may want to do a case study of a group or individual, arguing for or against a specific theoretical framework that might be used to understand the case. You must submit a project prospectus by October 18--earlier is fine (see attached form.) Rough drafts are required and may be handed in anytime up to and including November 22. For samples of previous students' projects, click here.
Rough Drafts must include at least an outline, draft of one section, and a reference list. On November 22 you will bring your project rough draft to class and you and your classmates will spend some time reading and providing feedback to each other.
Project papers will be graded on a point scale from 0 to 4.0 (see scoring rubric), and will count for 50% of your course grade. Please use APA format for references. Those of you working on degrees in education, especially educational psychology, should buy a copy of the APA manual; it is the style book used by most researchers in education and psychology.
4.0
Problem/question clearly described and relevant to learning and educational practice.
Theories and ideas from multiple course readings are used in ways appropriate to the problem/question. Course readings are central to the analysis, argument, or position. Readings are used critically, in the service of exploring the problem/question within the chosen structure (see suggestions for research proposals, lit reviews, etc.) Paper makes connections between course readings and outside readings.
Paper goes beyond class discussions/assigned readings in important ways--extending the ideas and/or challenging them from additional perspectives (your own, other authors'). Potential or actual contribution of your project to what we know about this aspect of learning and educational practice is supported and clearly described. Implications for practice or future research well-grounded in your project and clearly described.
Paper makes a coherent and well-supported argument for a particular stance or interpretation, including consideration of alternate viewpoints or interpretations.
For literature reviews: review is focused but broad enough to get a sense of the main positions taken by current researchers on the issue. These positions are clearly described. Questions posed for future research arise from the literature review.
For research proposals and case studies: Literature review focused,
sets up research problem, questions, and/or hypotheses well. Analysis of
data shows a good grasp of problem complexity and theoretical implications.
3.5
Problem/question clearly described and relevant to learning and educational practice.
Theories and ideas from course readings are used in ways appropriate to the problem/question. Course readings tend to be peripheral to the analysis, argument, or position. Readings are sometimes used critically, in the service of exploring the problem/question within the chosen structure. Paper makes connections between course readings and outside readings.
Paper occasionally goes beyond class discussions/assigned readings in important ways--extending the ideas and/or challenging them from additional perspectives (your own, other authors').
Potential or actual contribution of your project to what we know about this aspect of learning and educational practice is described, but connections to the paper's central arguments are not always clear.
Paper makes an argument, but support is weak in spots; may fail to consider alternate viewpoints or interpretations.
For literature reviews: review is focused but broad enough to get a sense of the main positions taken by current researchers on the issue, but these positions are not always clearly described and/or supported. Questions posed for future research arise from the literature review.
For research proposals and case studies: Literature review focused, sets up research problem, questions, and/or hypotheses fairly well, but the critical link between the literature and the research questions is not completely clear. Analysis of data shows a good grasp of problem complexity and theoretical implications.
3.0
Problem/question clearly described and relevant to learning and educational practice.
Use of theories and ideas from course readings appropriate to the problem/question and the chosen structure. Readings tend to be used uncritically--review is made up of summaries without regard to the strengths or limitations of the sources. Paper uses outside materials, but doesn't go beyond course materials in exploring the question/problem in important ways.
Contributions and implications of the project clearly described, but not clearly supported. Paper makes an argument, but support is weak in spots; may fail to consider alternate viewpoints or interpretations.
For literature reviews: review is somewhat unfocused or too narrow to get a sense of the main positions taken by current researchers on the issue. These positions may not be clearly described. Some questions posed for future research seem unconnected to the literature review.
For research proposals and studies: Literature review is somewhat unfocused, or relationship to research problem, questions, and/or hypotheses may not be clearly described. Analysis of data shows some grasp of problem complexity and theoretical implications.
2.0
Problem/question described, relevance to learning and educational practice may not be clearly stated. Use of theories/ideas from course generally appropriate, but may show some misunderstandings. Use of readings uncritical or minimal. Problem/question not thoroughly explored, or paper does not make a coherent and well-supported argument.
For literature reviews: review is unfocused or too narrow to get a sense of the main positions taken by current researchers on the issue. These positions not clearly described. Questions posed for future research seem unconnected to the literature review.
For research proposals and studies: Literature review is unfocused, or relationship to research problem, questions, and/or hypotheses not clearly described. Analysis of data shows little grasp of problem complexity or theoretical implications.
1.0
Problem/question described, relevance to learning and educational practice may not be clearly stated. Major misconceptions as demonstrated by misuse of theories, ideas, or readings. No coherent argument, or support is weak or missing.