I.
Course Number: EDUC 7797/01
Course Title:
Capstone Experience and Portfolio
College:
Bagwell College of Education
Semester:
Spring 2009
Room:
KH 1106
II.
Professor:
III.
IV.
Class Meetings:
Required Text:
American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American
Psychological Association (5th edition). Washington, DC: Author.
V.
Catalog Course Description: EDUC 7797. The Portfolio. 3-0-3
This is the capstone experience for the Master of Education in Adolescent Education. Candidates
work independently under the supervision of the portfolio committee. The portfolio requirements
resemble, in part, those required by the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards
(NBPTS). The purpose of the portfolio is to implement a systematic, reflection-in-action
approach to problem solving and decision-making. This process is designed to document the
candidate’s development of expertise as a teacher-leader. A primary goal of the portfolio is to
document the candidate’s impact on student achievement. The portfolio provides a detailed
authentic picture of the candidate’s professional practice and reflective analysis of the integration
of courses taken supported by theory. Changes in classroom practices as well as ones’ self are
documented.
VI.
Professional Portfolio Narrative:
A required element in each portfolio for the Graduate Program is the portfolio narrative. The
purpose of the portfolio narrative is to ensure that every candidate reflects on each of the
proficiencies on the CPI with regard to what evidence the candidate has selected for his/her
portfolio. In your portfolio, you need to include a narrative, which includes descriptive, analytic
and reflective writing in which you reflect on each proficiency and how you make the case that
the evidence you have selected in your portfolio supports a particular proficiency, using the
Portfolio Narrative Rubric as a guide. The narrative should be comprehensive, documenting
research-based best practices.
VII.
Purpose and Rationale:
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY’S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:
Collaborative development of expertise in teaching and learning
The Professional Teacher Education Unit (PTEU) at Kennesaw State University is committed to
developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers and 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 who enhance
the structures that support all learning. To that end, the PTEU fosters the development of
candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to proficient to expert and
leader. Within the PTEU conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a process of continued
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
1
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 PTEU
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, the public and private schools, parents and other professional partners, the PTEU
meets the ultimate goal of assisting Georgia schools in bringing all students to high levels of
learning.
Knowledge Base:
Teacher development is generally recognized as a continuum that includes four phases:
preservice, induction, in-service, renewal (Odell, Huling, & 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 believe 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.
Use of Technology:
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. They will
master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel
confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
Field Based Activities
While completing your graduate program at Kennesaw State University, you are required to be
involved in a variety of leadership and school-based activities directed at the improvement of
teaching and learning. Appropriate activities may include, but are not limited to, attending and
presenting at professional conferences, actively serving on or chairing school-based committees,
attending PTA/school board meetings, leading or presenting professional development activities
at the school or district level, and participating in education-related community events. As you
continue your educational experiences, you are encouraged to explore every opportunity to learn
by doing.
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
2
VIII: Goals and Objectives:
As a result of satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of this course, the candidate will
accomplish the objectives listed in the table below.
Course objective
Provides portfolio
evidence and a
narrative that links
candidate’s teaching
practice to national,
state, and institutional
standards.
Writes descriptively,
analytically, and
reflectively
KSU M.Ed.
Candidate
Performance
Instrument Link
Proficiency 3.2
Proficiency 2.6
Proficiency 3.2
Demonstrates
systematic expertise
as a teacher-leader.
Proficiency 3.4
Presents through a
formal conference the
results of systematic
expertise as a teacherleader
Proficiency 3.4
Proficiency 3.1
Proficiency 2.6
Presents professional
experience to
colleagues and peers.
Proficiency 1.1
Proficiency 3.1
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
NBPTS
Proposition Link
PSC/NCATE Link
Core proposition 4(Thinks
systematically about
practice and learns
from experience)
Professional and
pedagogical knowledge
and skills.
Core propositions 4
(Thinks
systematically about
practice and learns
from experience)
and 5 (members of
learning
communities)
Core propositions 4
(Thinks
systematically about
practice and learns
from experience)
and 5 (members of
learning
communities)
Core propositions 4
(Thinking
systematically about
practice and
learning from
experience) and 5
(members of
learning
communities) and 2
(know subjects they
teach and how to
teach them)
Core propositions 4
(Thinking
systematically about
practice and
learning from
experience) and 5
(members of
Professional and
pedagogical knowledge
and skills.
Dispositions
Dispositions
Dispositions
Professional and
pedagogical knowledge
and skills.
Dispositions
Professional and
pedagogical knowledge
and skills.
Dispositions
Professional and
pedagogical knowledge
and skills.
3
Works collaboratively
and provides feedback
to peers.
ALL
Completes all
required elements of
the M.Ed. in
Adolescent Education
portfolio.
Proficiency 1,2,3
Follows institutional
policies and
professional
guidelines of
academic honesty.
Proficiency 3.5
Exhibits professional
behavior in
interactions with
professors and
colleagues.
Proficiency 3.5
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
learning
communities)
Core propositions 4
(Thinking
systematically about
practice and
learning from
experience) and 5
(members of
learning
communities)
Core propositions 4
(Thinking
systematically about
practice and
learning from
experience) and 5
(members of
learning
communities)
Core propositions 4
(Thinking
systematically about
practice and
learning from
experience) and 5
(members of
learning
communities)
Core propositions 4
(Thinking
systematically about
practice and
learning from
experience) and 5
(members of
learning
communities)
Dispositions
Dispositions
Professional and
pedagogical knowledge
and skills.
Dispositions
Dispositions
4
IX. Requirements/Assignments
Each assignment must receive a L3 or L4 rating for satisfactory completion of the course.
All assignments must be presented through Chalk and Wire for assessment.
These include a portfolio of evidence with reflective narratives and a research presentation.
1. Assemble Online Chalk and Wire Portfolio of Evidence which
1. Addresses all proficiencies
2. Corresponds to Candidate Performance Standards
3. Includes a description, analysis and reflection of each piece of evidence in the
Capstone Portfolio
4. Demonstrates multiple examples of application of learning to teaching practices
5. Shows assessment of impact on student learning and adjustments in practice
6. Includes positive opinions and interactions with students, parents, and others
A required element in each capstone portfolio for the Graduate Program is describing,
analyzing and reflecting on each piece of evidence for each of the proficiencies. Using
Chalk and Wire technology. See WebCT for an electronic copy of the template for
writing each upload narrative (See template below).
Context: Describe the Artifact
“This artifact was developed to”…describe with one or two sentences the condition under which the artifact
was created (Assignment? Related to licensure? Job related?) Describe what happened? When? Where?
How was it done? Why was it done?
Your Role:
What was your role in the event(s) described? Part of a team? Alone? Author? Editor? Researcher?
Instructor?
Reflection Part A: Analyze how the artifact relates to the proficiency
How does this artifact clearly illustrate you have the capacity to perform the standard you are relating to?
What worked? What needs tweaking? What needs deleting? Why?
Example wording: “I have included NAME OF ARTIFACT with this proficiency because… PROVIDE
RATIONALE IN TWO OR FOUR SENTENCES. This artifact demonstrates my ability/position/emerging
skill/competence with regard to NAME OF PROFICIENCY in that PROVIDE AN EXPLANATION OF
HOW THE EXPERIENCE YOU HAD CLEARLY SHOWS YOUR CONFIDENCE/SKILL/CAPACTIY
RELATIVE TO THE PROFICIENCY.”
Part A: I have included NAME OF ARTIFACT with this proficiency because…
? Editor? Researcher? Instructor?
Reflection Part B: Reflect on the artifact/experience and what you will do to grow/improve as a
professional
What next? Upon reflection, what has this experience suggested as ‘next moves’ for you as a developing
professional? Example wording: “Given this experience, I am determined/intend/will/plan to…WHAT
WILL YOU CHANGE/IMPROVE/ LEAVE AS IS? IF APPROPRIATE, DESCRIBE SPECIFIC
ACTIONS YOU WILL TAKE TO FURTHER DEVELOP YOUR PROFESSIONAL SKILLS IN THIS
AREA.”
Part B: Given this experience, I…
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
5
CAPSTONE PORTFOLIO CHECKLISTTHE RUBRIC: MASTERS PORTFOLIO NARRATIVE RATING SCALE
L1 – Little or No Evidence - Little or no evidence exists that proficiencies are addressed through reflective analysis. Writing may be only
descriptive in nature and lack analysis or critical reflection. Evidence presented may be vague, brief, or not linked to proficiencies. Reference to
the proficiencies may be missing altogether. Through writing, candidate fails to make connections between evidence presented and demonstration
of expertise in the outcome. Candidate is unable to assess impact on student learning. There is little to no evidence that the candidate has been able
to extend and apply knowledge and skills to daily practice. Finally, the candidate’s reflective analysis may express negative opinions about
students, parents, or other professionals or blame students and parents for the student’s inability to learn.
L2 – Limited Evidence - Limited evidence exists that proficiencies are addressed through reflective analysis. Writing is mostly descriptive with
limited elements of analysis or critical reflection. Evidence presented may address some of the proficiencies while others are not addressed at all or
are hard to identify. Through writing, candidate makes limited connections between evidence presented and demonstration of expertise in the
outcome. Candidate has difficulty assessing impact on student learning or adjusting practice accordingly. Opinions toward students, parents, or
other professionals are difficult to identify.
L3 – Clear Evidence - Clear evidence exists that proficiencies are addressed through reflective analysis. Writing is descriptive, analytical, and
reflective. Evidence presented clearly addresses all of the proficiencies with some being richer in detail than others. Through writing, candidate
makes clear connections between evidence presented and demonstration of expertise in the outcome. Candidate assesses impact on student
learning and adjusts practice accordingly. There is clear evidence that the candidate has been able to extend and apply knowledge and skills to
daily practice. Positive opinions and behaviors about students, parents, or other professionals are evident.
L4 – Clear, Consistent, and Convincing Evidence - Clear, consistent, and convincing evidence exists that proficiencies are addressed through
reflective analysis. Writing is rich in description, analysis, and reflection. Evidence presented addresses all proficiencies with evidence of multiple
examples of extensions and application of learning to teaching practices. Through writing, candidate makes clear, consistent, and convincing
connections between evidence presented and demonstration of expertise in the outcome. Candidate consistently assesses impact on student
learning and provides multiple examples of adjusting practice accordingly. Positive opinions and interactions with students, parents, and other
professionals are evident. Candidate is positive about teaching every student and about each student’s ability to learn.
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
6
Subject-Matter Expert
Candidates know the subjects they teach and how to teach those subjects to students. Each candidate:




1.1 Possesses broad, current and specialized knowledge of subject matter and demonstrates this knowledge to
colleagues, parents and students.
1.2 Possesses an interdisciplinary understanding of curriculum and its applications to real life and accurately
represents understanding through use of multiple explanations, technologies and/or strategies.
1.3 Possesses strong pedagogical content knowledge and uses that knowledge to create approaches to instructional
challenges.
1.4 Actualizes the integration of content, pedagogy and interdisciplinary understanding through instruction that is
integrated, flexible, elaborate and deep.
Primary Artifact
1.1
L1
1.2
L1
1.3
L1
1.4
L1
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
Secondary Artifact
Secondary Artifact
7
Facilitator of Learning:
Candidates are committed to students and are responsible for managing and monitoring student learning. Candidates believe
that all students can learn; as a result, each candidate:
 2.1 Treats students equitably and provides equitable access to the full curriculum by respecting individual differences and
adjusting (or assisting teachers in adjusting) practices accordingly.
 2.2 Understands human development and learning and uses this understanding to create enriching educational experiences
and/or environments for all students.
 2.3 Creates safe, well-managed, supportive, inclusive and challenging learning environments.
 2.4 Uses multiple methods, technologies, resources and organizational arrangements to meet goals articulated for
individual students, class instruction and the overall school improvement plan.
 2.5 Monitors student progress with a variety of formal and informal evaluation methods and uses results to improve student
learning.
 2.6 Is accountable to multiple audiences, accurately interprets student performance data and communicates results to
multiple audiences in multiple formats.
Primary Artifact
2.1
L1
2.2
L1
2.3
L1
2.4
L1
2.5
L1
2.6
L1
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
Secondary Artifact
Secondary Artifact
8
Collaborative Professional:
Candidates think systematically about practice, learn from experience, and are members of learning communities. Each
candidate:
 3.1 Collaborates with colleagues, parents and/or other professionals and leads appropriately to strengthen school
effectiveness, to advance knowledge, and to influence policy and practice.
 3.2 Reflects regularly upon daily practice, and draws upon experience and the professional literature to design and conduct
research aimed at improved student achievement.
 3.3 Proactively involves and leads parents and other members of the community in support of instruction and education.
 3.4 Engages in on-going professional development by joining professional organizations, participating in conferences,
mentoring new staff, etc.
 3.5 Adheres to professional ethical standards while reporting, conducting and publishing research.
Primary Artifact
3.1
L1
3.2
L1
3.3
L1
3.4
L1
3.5
L1
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
L2
L3
L4
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
Secondary Artifact
Secondary Artifact
9
2. Capstone Research Presentation—Present your capstone research at the M.Ed. Adolescent
Education Teacher as Leader Conference. The rubric for this activity is presented on the next page. Your
20-30 minute-presentation and other details will be discussed in class. Please plan on attending
presentations all day of the day you are presenting. Also note, programs this year are going to be
produced by a printer. That means the deadline for the abstract will be earlier - and announced in
class and on WebCT. Abstracts (as a word document) will include your
Name:
Content Subject:
Title:
Abstract: (250 word maximum)
Biography: (150 word maximum)
Your presentation PowerPoint also serves as the LAST program assessment. Please place a
copy of the PowerPoint in the Chalk and Wire Program Portfolio under Assessment #8.
Thanks.
3. Diversity Assignment on Chalk and Wire
4. Final Graduate Diversity Survey. [To be done in class.] Go to
http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=QNcJQLf4s_2fdp6rB6eaE9Tg_3d_3d to
complete the survey. Just show the final page to your assigned professor when you
complete the survey.
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
10
Presentation Rubric (Chalk and Wire Program Assessment #8)
L2 – Emerging but
Unsatisfactory
2
L3 – Satisfactory
L4 – Exemplary
3
4
The candidate does not
describe the purpose,
importance and significance
of the research
The candidate does not does
clearly describe how the
research is related to best
practices in curriculum,
instruction, and assessment.
The candidate vaguely
describes the significance,
importance and/or the
potential impact of the
research on the classroom,
school or district curricular,
instructional or assessment
practices.
The candidate presents TWO
of the following:
1. The candidate clearly
describes the purpose of the
research project.
2. He/she provides
documentation through prior
research and/or theory that
the study is linked to best
practices in curriculum,
instruction and assessment.
3. The candidate clearly
describes the
significance/importance of
the research and offers a
realistic view of the potential
impact of the research on the
classroom, school or district
curricular, instructional or
assessment practices.
The candidate presents ALL
of the following:
1. The candidate clearly
describes the purpose of the
research project and provides
a compelling reason for the
project.
2. He/she provides
documentation through prior
research OR theoretical
frameworks that the study is
linked to best practices in
curriculum, instruction and
assessment.
3. The candidate clearly
describes the
significance/importance of
the research providing
compelling evidence of the
likely potential impact of the
research on the classroom,
school or district curricular,
instructional or assessment
practices.
Score 1
2
3
4
The candidate presented no
research questions.
The candidate’s research
questions appear to be trivial.
Questions are vague and/or
confusing and poorly aligned
Candidate formulates
significant research questions
and aligned within the
literature.
Candidate formulated
research questions that are
expressed clearly and
precisely. Candidate
RUBRIC FOR M.ED.
PRESENTATION
L1- Unsatisfactory
Purpose, Importance,
Significance and
Impact
Score: 1
English II. Knowledge of English
Language Arts
III. Instructional Design and
Decision
Math: III. Knowledge of
Mathematics, V. Knowledge of
Teaching Practice
Science: II. Understanding Science,
III. Understanding Science Teaching
Social Studies: III. Knowledge of Subject
Matter
Research Questions
English II. Knowledge of
English Language Arts
III. Instructional Design and
Decision
Math: III. Knowledge of
Mathematics, V. Knowledge of
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
11
Teaching Practice
Science: II. Understanding
with the professional
literature.
Science, III.
Understanding Science
Teaching
Social Studies: III. Knowledge of
Subject Matter
Appropriate
Methodology
Data Sources & Data
Collection
English XV. Professional
Score 1
2
3
The candidate presents an
Inappropriate methodology
and data collection
The candidate does not
adequately or accurately
describe in detail the methods
used in the research process
Candidate uses insufficient
data to answer research
questions, support planning
or decision-making/or data
sources utilized do not
provide adequate information
to support planning or
decision-making related to
improving student learning.
The candidate adequately and
accurately describes in
appropriate detail the
methods used in the research
process.
Candidate uses data sources
which provide appropriate
information to answer
research questions, support
planning and decision making
related to student learning
Score 1
2
3
The candidate adequately and
accurately describes in
appropriate detail the
methods used in the research
process.
Candidate uses data sources
with appropriate and rich
detail providing information
to answer research questions,
support planning and decision
making related to student
learning. Data sources are
numerous including but and
not limited to demographic
data and data related to
student learning.
4
Candidate does not present
results and/or conclusion
Candidate misinterprets
findings or makes claims
unsupported by data. Does
not make link back to
research questions, theoretical
or research framework. Fails
to identify strengths and
limitation or implications or
future directions for research.
Candidate interprets data
clearly and accurately,
elaborating and exemplifying
key findings. Candidate
comes to logical conclusions
and describes reasonable
connections between research
questions, school
improvement and student
learning. Identifies strengths
Candidate interprets data
clearly, precisely and
accurately, elaborating and
exemplifying key findings.
Candidate distinguishes
between consistent and
inconsistent findings and
comes to logical conclusions.
Candidate understands
assumptions and inferences
Community
Math: XII. Contributing to the
Professional Community
Science: XI. Developing
Collegiality and Leadership
Social Studies: XII. Professional
Contributions
Results and Conclusions
English II. Knowledge of
English Language Arts
III. Instructional Design and
Decision
Math: III. Knowledge of
Mathematics, V. Knowledge of
Teaching Practice
Science: II. Understanding
Science, III. Understanding
Science Teaching
Social Studies: III. Knowledge of
Subject Matter
demonstrates a deep
understanding of the
complexity of issues by
recognizing the assumptions
build into the questions asked
and is able to analyze those
assumptions for justifiability.
4
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
12
and limitations as well as
implications for practice
and creates intentional, insightful
connections between research
questions, and student learning.
Cogently presents insights
gained from the data which
emerge from deep, critical
analysis.
Candidate accurately summarizes
findings and provides informed
perspectives on them. Identifies
strengths and limitations as well
as implications for practice &
policy. Makes recommendations
for future research.
Communication
Score 1
2
3
4
English XV. Professional
Community
Math: XII. Contributing to the
Professional Community
Science: XI. Developing
Collegiality and Leadership
Social Studies: XII. Professional
Contributions
Looks only at note cards/
slides/ feet, etc; speaks softly;
often uses repetitive
expressions such as “you
know?” “like” “um”; only
reads paper or slides; speaks
in a monotone manner; needs
enthusiasm for topic.
Looks at audience fairly
regularly; reads from paper or
slides and regularly speaks
from memory, rarely uses
repetitive phrases such as
“you know?” “like” “um”;
some enthusiasm for topic
Design/Artist Element
English
Score 1
Occasionally looks at
audience; occasionally speaks
clearly; regularly uses
repetitive expressions such as
“you know?” “like” “um”;
reads mostly from paper or
slides; varies speaking tone
occasionally; enthusiasm for
topic unclear
2
Looks regularly at the
audience; speaks clearly;
speaks exclusively or almost
exclusively from memory;
refrains from using repetitive
phrases such as “you know?”
“like” “um”; varies speaking
tone regularly; has clear
enthusiasm for topic
4
Needs design elements or
design elements are unrelated
to subject of presentation
Presentation Design element
is in preliminary form, needs
substantial work
Presentation Design elements
are artistically competent,
integrated with presentation
XV. Professional Community
Math: XII. Contributing to the
Professional Community
Science:XI. Developing
Collegiality and Leadership
Social Studies: XII. Professional
Contributions
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
3
Presentation Design elements
are artistically skillful;
interesting; strongly
integrated to presentation
13
X:
Evaluation and Grading:
XI.
S – Satisfactory completion of all course requirements and assignments (L3 or
L4 levels; rubrics available at end of syllabus)
U – Failure to complete all course requirements. If a candidate does not make
satisfactory progress, he/she will receive a “U” in the class and must re-enroll for
the following semester in order to complete the portfolio, paying all related fees
for 3 graduate hours of credit.
I - See most recent graduate catalog for guidelines describing when a grade of
“incomplete” may be assigned.
Policies
Diversity: A variety of materials and instructional strategies will be employed to meet the needs
of the different learning styles of diverse learners in class. Candidates will gain knowledge as
well as an understanding of differentiated strategies and curricula for providing effective
instruction and assessment within multicultural classrooms. One element of course work is
raising candidate awareness of critical multicultural issues. A second element is to cause
candidates to explore how multiple attributes of multicultural populations influence decisions in
employing specific methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are age,
disability, ethnicity, family structure, gender, geographic region, giftedness, language, race,
religion, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status. An emphasis on cognitive style
differences provides a background for the consideration of cultural context.
Kennesaw State University provides program accessibility and accommodations for persons
defined as disabled under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 or the Americans with
Disabilities Act of 1990. A number of services are available to support students with disabilities
within their academic program. In order to make arrangements for special services, students must
visit the Office of Disabled Student Support Services (ext. 6443) and develop an individual
assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
Please be aware there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State
University that address each of the multicultural variables outlined above.
Academic Honesty: KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their academic programs in
an ethical, professional manner. Any work that students present in fulfillment of program or
course requirements should represent their own efforts, achieved without giving or receiving any
unauthorized assistance. Any student who is found to have violated these expectations will be
subject to disciplinary action.
XII.
Course Outline—This outline is subject to change WITH NOTICE
a. Check WebCt calendar for course outline each week
b. The course outline is due to change week to week
c. Some classes will be optional, depending on the needs of the class and
individual needs
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
14
References/Bibliography
Brause, R.S., & Mayher, J.S. (Eds.). (1991). Search and research: What the inquiring teacher
needs to know. London: Falmer.
Campbell, D. M., Cignetti, P. B., Melenyzer, B. J., Netttles, D. H., & Wyman. R. M. (2001).
How to develop a professional portfolio: A manual for teachers (2nd ed). Boston: Allyn
and Bacon.
Girot E.A. (2001). Reflective skills. In Maslin-Prothero S.(2nd ed.) Baillere’s study skills for
nurses 2001 – second edition. Baillere Tindall/RCN. London.
Hubbard, R.S., & Power, B.M. (1993). The art of classroom inquiry: A handbook for teacherresearchers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Kincheloe, J. (1991). Teachers as researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to
empowerment. London: Falmer.
LaBoskey, V.K. (1994). Development of reflective practice. New York: Teachers College.
McIntyre, D., & Byrd, D. (Eds.). (2000). Research on effective models for teacher
education. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin.
McMillan, J. H., & Wergin, J. F. (2002). Understanding and evaluating educational research
(2nd ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Rogers, S., & Danielson, K. (1996). Teacher portfolios. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Russell, T., & Munby, H. (Eds.). (1992). Teachers and teaching: From classroom to
reflection. London: Falmer.
Smyth, J., & Shacklock, G. (1998). Re-Making Teaching: Ideology, policy and practice.
London: Routledge.
Tabachnick, B.R., & Zeichner, K. (1991). Issues and practices in inquiry oriented-teacher
education. London: Falmer.
Wilson, J., & Wing. J.L. (1993). Thinking for themselves: Developing strategies for reflective
learning. Armadale, Australia: Eleanor Curtai
EDUC 7797 Spring 09 Terry/Reeve
15
Revision Spring 2009