St. Francis Xavier University
Faculty of Education
Department of
Leadership and Curriculum
Whatsoever
things are true
Education 532 Curriculum
Theory
Spring 2012
|
Instructor |
A. Foran |
|
Office |
226
Xavier Hall |
|
Phone |
867-5422
(O) |
|
|
863-2963
(H) |
|
Email |
aforan@stfx.ca |
|
Skype |
andrewsforan |
Please note office hours are on a
drop-in basis. If you require a specific time please contact me for an
appointment.
Class Times:
6:00pm --9 pm Tuesdays
Location:
Elluminate
Blackboard: http://blackboard.stfx.ca/
Required Text
Parkay, F. W., Anctil, E. J. and Hass, G.
(2009). Curriculum leadership: Readings for developing quality educational
programs (9th Edition).
Boston, MA: Pearson
Recommended Text
American Psychological Association (2002). Publication
manual of the American Psychological Association (6th
Edition). Washington, DC:
American Psychological Association.
* Both of these resources
are available at the St. FX Book Store or the Curriculum Resource Center (3rd
floor Xavier Hall)
Additional Readings
* Based on interest and
student need, selected materials if required will be assessed for an additional
duplicating cost to be determined at the end of the course.
Ethics
Please refer
to the Graduate Course Confidentiality Guidelines June, 2004
Course Description
EDUC 532 examines key concepts and forces involved in shaping
curriculum decision-making, theories of curriculum, and practical aspects of
planning, implementation, evaluation, and research. Understanding curriculum is
fundamental to understanding the field of education. Formal education assumes
that those responsible have some notions of what constitutes a suitable
curriculum. Although the term curriculum is extremely wide, it typically
involves people constructing, that is planning, selecting, sequencing, and
evaluating, organized learning experiences for themselves and/or others. For
educators, curriculum is what is to be taught and learned, and there are many
different views about what is good and appropriate. This course is designed to
help you to develop an understanding of curriculum by problematizing the
concepts and discourses that constitute the curriculum field. The purpose is to
have you develop an informed theory in your own contexts of practice. It is assumed that you will be engaged at some time in curriculum work within
your professional activities. Therefore, you will be expected to engage the
curriculum literature as a means of reflecting upon the historical and (con)textual
forces which shape curriculum work and the role of professional educators in
curriculum construction. You will be expected to describe your own assumptions,
predispositions, and biases about curriculum, articulate your developing notions
of curriculum, and apply your developing frameworks to your own educational
practice in the form of proposals for change and improvement. The course is designed to be participatory and practice-based (entailing
critical reflection on curriculum practice in light of reading and discussion),
responsive and collaborative (focusing on the particular contexts and interests
of participants) and critical (entailing constructive critique of education and
other values and assumptions that inform curriculum policy, organization, and
practice).
Intended Course Outcomes
- To gain a historical perspective on the field of
curriculum studies.
- To identify basic issues in the field of curriculum
studies and to formulate personal responses to these issues.
- To gain practical experience in working with current
research, allowing us to contextualize our practices in the vast field of
curriculum theory.
- To read widely in the literature on curriculum studies
and to discuss this literature with peers.
- To become familiar with the information on
curriculum available from a variety of sources.
Schedule for
Spring 2012
|
Session
Dates |
Topics |
Assignments |
Chapter—Articles |
|
April 3 |
Course Introduction:
Conceptualization of the
curricular field
|
In-class curricular activity:
-5 camps-6 orientation
questions -Tyler Rational |
Material
will be covered in-class |
|
April 10 |
Overview of the field: Crises to Re-conceptualization …
|
-Schwab's 4 Common Places
-Curricular Points of Reference: Habits of seeing, community of
interpreters
|
Material
will be covered in-class
|
|
April 17 |
Political text
-
Reproduction theory
-
Resistance & Discursive
|
*Setting up Mind Walk with guiding questions SEMINAR:
SEMINAR: |
|
|
April 24 |
Descartes
- Dualisms
- living the disconnect
- breaking the polar delusion
|
-For this class you will be asked to watch the movie Mind
Walk. The questions to guide the viewing will be presented April 17th
|
|
|
May 1 |
Poststructuralist, Deconstructed, Postmodern text
·
Truth—truths
·
Making it strange!
·
Juxtapositions
|
Discussing Descartes
SEMINAR:
SEMINAR:
|
|
|
May 8 |
Gender text
·
Feminism
·
Patriarchal Dominance
·
Isolation
|
SEMINAR:
SEMINAR: |
|
|
May 15 |
Phenomenological text
·
Lived experiences
·
Language
·
Currere |
SEMINAR:
SEMINAR:
|
|
|
May 22 |
Racial text
·
Multiculturalism
·
Pluralism
·
Identity
|
SEMINAR:
SEMINAR:
|
|
|
May 29 |
Autobiographical/Biographical text
·
Voice
·
Place
·
Ways of knowing
·
Stories, myths, and lore |
SEMINAR:
SEMINAR: |
|
|
June 5 |
Aesthetic Text & Theological Text: Breaking the
Dualism
·
Artistry
·
Representations
·
Imagination
·
Exalt thy new god
·
Hermeneutics
·
The forgotten lesson …
|
|
|
|
TBA
|
Independent 6 hour group
sessions focusing on your
common discourse (see
assignment below) |
Prep time in groups of three. I will
book Collaborate time for you to work on your final paper. I suggest booking
this with me half way and at the end.
|
DUE June 10, 2012 |
Course Completion Policy
If course work is not completed by the end of the regular
scheduled term, a mark of IP (in progress) will be granted. This mark
will stand until the work is completed and submitted by a negotiated date or the
first day of the following term. If the outstanding work is not submitted
by the established date, a grade of NM (no mark) will be entered as the
final mark. For further information please refer to the Graduate Studies
Handbook.
Assignments
1.
Connections: You will keep a list of specific quotes and the
context of the thought. Connections can emanate from the following sources: 1)
your text (direct quotes based on the selected reading); 2) your colleagues from discussions from the session
seminars; and 3) yourself--a curricular thinker. Please provide an
indicator to who is to be credited for the citation. These embedded-connections
(1 paragraph max 5-8 sentences) will be posted to BlackBoard
under the discussion board--Session 1 / Session 2 and so on. Think of your
connections as a place in which to record your opinions, concrete examples
linked to your practice, answers to selected questions, questions, and depth of
reading engagement that challenges you as a curriculum theorist. This is an
on-going assessment and will be due at the end of every class, posted no later
than the next day 9 pm. I expect each of you to respond (2-3
sentences max) to at least two of
your colleagues postings per Session before the next class. This is worth 33.33% of your final mark.
rubric
2.
Contextualizations: Within your specific area of educational
research interests, prepare a seminar, entitled
Contextualizations: “?” This seminar will contain a brief discussion
(no more than 5 minutes) of curriculum theory as an overview to one of the chapters from the text, how this curricular
theorizing has impacted education, a review of 2 or 3 key thinkers through their
articles on how they have
contributed to this discourse, key concepts that inform educational practice,
how this can challenge curriculum design and implementation, and the realities
of classroom practice force the theory practice gap to be discussed. Your
seminar is not a summary of the articles; rather 4 succinct slides
(ppt.) that places us into deep and meaningful discussions: large group or in
smaller chats. In short, you need to synthesize the information, raise questions
and facilitate continued discussion. You should strive to be creative,
provide a unique focus to educators, engages us experientially, and through a
seminar challenge us to
make formal inquiries into the vast quagmire curriculum theory--challenge us
with deep rooted questions. The 30 minute presentation is worth 33.33%
of your final mark in the course and is due according to the course schedule.
The selected articles must be emailed to me (title and author[s]) one week
before you are scheduled to present and the power point must be emailed to me 24
hours before your seminar. rubric
3.
Discourse (in groups of 3-4): Deconstruct an area of public school
(split classes, assessment, examinations, subject topics, scheduling,
semestering, policy, curriculum, extra curricular, fringe programs and so on...) by taking a curricular
stand--stating your public--professional position as curriculum designer and planner;
in short a curricular leader. Think of this as your curricular advertisement to draw
attention to your instructional-leadership approach and planning values designed
to advance public education. According to interest, and writing style, and
curricular focus, you will
anchor your analysis or challenge in the course lenses (see schedule above), you will use the selected readings
from the text, and concepts/ideas/thoughts/connections from the daily-curricular BlackBoard Postings to support your
discussion. This paper is
to be 6 (ds) pages MAX, referenced, cited, and formatted according to APA.
This aspect of assessment is worth 33.33% of your final mark, and is due to be
submitted for evaluation during the June 10, 2012. If additional time is
needed please inform the instructor before the end of the course.
rubric
Course Evaluation
Criteria
(assignments/papers/presentations)
1.
Demonstrates all expected criteria listed below, going beyond
the usual work and normal expectation for graduate engagement. Includes strong
evidence of critical thinking, while maintaining uniqueness, and creativity.
2.
Uses all expected/usual criteria listed below. Student draws rich sources
of information, and demonstrates original thinking.
3.
Demonstrates ability to select pertinent information with the
ability to analyze and to synthesize. Student is attentive to detail, clear,
direct, and precise in thought.
4.
Still demonstrates ability to select and to analyze, but attempts
to synthesize with evidence of student’s own input. Shows good and consistent
organization of ideas.
5.
Some evidence of student’s own input. Efficient use of literature,
good organization of material and was able to draw valid conclusions.
6.
Clear, ordered writing/work with evidence of some attention to the
inclusion of original ideas. Evidence of understanding of the nature and scope
of the topic.
7. Unsatisfactory. Deficient in most of the
above.
Discourse Evaluation
Criteria for Grading Graduate Work
Grade
|
Description
|
90 – 100
|
Excellent discourse with
respect to all criteria approaching excellent in quality.
Beyond usual
expectations. |
85 – 89
|
Toward excellence,
demonstrating refined ability at the graduate level |
80 – 84
|
Most
qualities of previous [85 – 89] category. |
75 – 79
|
Very good, solid
discourse; fulfills expectations at/for graduate level. |
70 – 74
|
Good
paper. |
65 – 69
|
Satisfactory, but
possibly demonstrating a lack of understanding in terms of expectations at
this level. |
60 – 64
|
Minimally acceptable. |
- 59
|
Unsatisfactory. |
Return to main page