KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet (10/02/2013)
Course Number/Program Name: INED 8335
Department: Inclusive Education
Degree Title: (if applicable) Ed.S/Ed.D. in Special Education
Proposed Effective Date: Summer 2014
Check one or more of the following and complete the appropriate sections:
Sections to be Completed
X New Course Proposal
II, III, IV, V, VII
Course Title Change
I, II, III
Course Number Change
I, II, III
Course Credit Change
I, II, III
Course Prerequisite Change
I, II, III
Course Description Change
I, II, III
Notes:
If proposed changes to an existing course are substantial (credit hours, title, and description), a new
course with a new number should be proposed.
A new Course Proposal (Sections II, III, IV, V, VII) is required for each new course proposed as
part of a new program. Current catalog information (Section I) is required for each existing
course incorporated into the program.
Minor changes to a course can use the simplified E-Z Course Change Form.
Submitted by:
Harriet Bessette
Faculty Member
_____
Date
Approved
Not Approved
Karen Kuhel
Department Curriculum Committee Date
Approved
Not Approved
Patricia McHatton
Department Chair
Date
College Curriculum Committee
Date
College Dean
Date
GPCC Chair
Date
Dean, Graduate College
Date
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Vice President for Academic Affairs Date
Approved
Not Approved
President
Date
1
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE/CONCENTRATION/PROGRAM CHANGE
I.
Current Information (Fill in for changes)
Page Number in Current Catalog N/A
Course Prefix and Number
Course Title
Class Hours
____Laboratory Hours_______Credit Hours________
Prerequisites
Description (or Current Degree Requirements)
II.
___
___
___
___
Proposed Information (Fill in for changes and new courses)
Course Prefix and Number: _ INED 8335___________________________
Course Title: __ Special Education from a Historical Perspective _________
Class Hours:
3____Laboratory Hours___0____CreditHours____3____
Prerequisites: Admission to the Ed.S./Ed.D. Program or Instructor/Program Coordinator
Approval
_
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements):
This course addresses the historical evolution of educational services for individuals with
disabilities within an ethic of justice framework. Critical analysis of the impact of events related
to human rights and cross-cultural views of education and disability are emphasized. Candidates
will examine ethical dilemmas from legal, theoretical, contextual and practical perspectives to
expand their view of education as it applies to all students in diverse P-12 classrooms.
III.
Justification
Tracing the evolution of the field of special education and examining the histories, legacies, and
positionalities that have contributed to the shaping of contemporary institutional practices in the
field are crucial if we are to assist candidates in understanding their role as educational change
agents. This course provides candidates with multiple opportunities to investigate the origins of
special education in order to gain a better understanding of the role of deficit-thinking - which
hampers progress for individuals with disabilities - and the needed shift to an asset-based model
that can support equitable learning opportunities for individuals with disabilities while
effectuating positive change.
IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor: Harriet Bessette (Also: McHatton, P; Brown, S; and Zimmer, K.)
Texts:
Required:
Danforth, S. (2009). The Incomplete Child (Disability Studies in Education) NY: Peter
Lang.
2
Lipsky, D. K., & Gartner, A. (1989). Beyond Separate Education: Quality Education for
All. Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
Winzer, M. A. (2009). A History of Special Education in the 20th Century: From
Integration to Inclusion. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Recommended:
Kode, K., & Howard, K. (Editor). (2002). Elizabeth Farrell and the History of Special
Education. Arlington, VA: Council Exceptional Children.
Osgood, R. L. (2007). The History of Special Education: A Struggle for Equality in
American Public Schools. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Additional Readings provided in class.
Prerequisites: Admission to the Ed.D program in Special Education.
Objectives:
1.
Candidates will analyze the shifting social and cultural constructions of disability
from pre-1700 through the early twentieth century and from the mid- twentieth
century to current day by examining historical highlights.
2.
Candidates will explore the philosophies, principles, theories, laws and policies
that were shaped by major federal legislation and litigation after 1960.
3.
Candidates will critique the historical, social and cross-cultural foundations that
frame our response to disability today.
4.
Candidates will discuss the distinction between the study of special education
and disability studies from a historical perspective on special education.
5.
Candidates will research cross-cultural understandings of disability from a
historical perspective.
6.
Candidates will critique and summarize the histories, legacies, and positionalities
of society that shaped contemporary institutional practice and its understanding
of disability.
7.
Candidates will explore and critique how inclusion has been operationalized and
examine factors related to inclusion and exclusion.
Instructional Methods:
A variety of instructional methods will be employed to maximize student engagement
and learning. Strategies include instructor- and student-guided discussion, text analysis
and written reflection, direct instruction, project-based, and group collaborations.
Instruction integrates theory and practice as it relates to curriculum development and
evaluation, allowing students to demonstrate advanced ability to design, implement, and
evaluate curriculum that promotes student learning.
3
Method of Evaluation:
1. Historical and Cultural Timeline with Objective Commentary Paper
2. Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary Paper (Key Assessment)
3. Critical Analysis of Disability within Historical, Social, Political, or Cultural Product
or Event
4. Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments
V.
Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
Resource
Faculty
Other Personnel
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
New Books
New Journals
Other (Specify)
Amount
_500_____
500
TOTAL
This course replaces an existing course. No funds are needed beyond library resources ($1000) to
purchase books and support journal subscriptions.
Funding Required Beyond
Normal Departmental Growth
4
VI. COURSE MASTER FORM
This form will be completed by the requesting department and will be sent to the Office of the
Registrar once the course has been approved by the Office of the President.
The form is required for all new courses.
DISCIPLINE
COURSE NUMBER
COURSE TITLE FOR LABEL
(Note: Limit 30 spaces)
Special Education
INED 8335
Special Ed Historical Perspect_________________
CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS
Approval, Effective Term
Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U)
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
Learning Support Programs courses which are
3-0-3
Summer 2014
Regular
required as prerequisites
APPROVED:
________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __
5
VII Attach Syllabus
(*Last day to withdraw w/o academic penalty: )
I.
COURSE NUMBER: INED 8335
COURSE TITLE: Special Education from a Historical Perspective
COLLEGE OR SCHOOL: Bagwell College of Education
SEMESTER/TERM & YEAR: Summer 2014
II.
INSTRUCTOR: Bessette, H. (Also, McHatton, P.; Brown, S.; Zimmer, K.)
TELEPHONE:
FAX:
E-MAIL:
OFFICE:
III.
CLASS MEETINGS:
IV.
TEXTS:
Required:
Danforth, S. (2009). The Incomplete Child (Disability Studies in Education) NY: Peter Lang.
Lipsky, D. K., & Gartner, A. (1989). Beyond Separate Education: Quality Education for All.
Baltimore, MD: Brookes.
Winzer, M. A. (2009). A History of Special Education in the 20th Century: From Integration
to Inclusion. Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Recommended:
Kode, K., & Howard, K. (Editor). (2002). Elizabeth Farrell and the History of Special
Education. Arlington, VA: Council Exceptional Children.
Osgood, R. L. (2007). The History of Special Education: A Struggle for Equality in American
Public Schools. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers.
Additional Readings provided in class.
6
V.
CATALOG COURSE DESCRIPTION
This course addresses the historical evolution of educational services for individuals with
disabilities within an ethic of justice framework. Critical analysis of the impact of events related
to human rights and cross-cultural views of education and disability are emphasized. Candidates
will examine ethical dilemmas from legal, theoretical, contextual and practical perspectives to
expand their view of education as it applies to all students in diverse P-12 classrooms.
Pre-requisites: Admission to the EDD program in Special Education.
VI.
PURPOSE/RATIONALE
Tracing the evolution of the field of special education and examining the histories, legacies, and
positionalities that have contributed to the shaping of contemporary institutional practices in the
field are crucial to understanding the work that must be done in the future to bring all learners to
high levels of achievement. Equity and excellence for all learners may be our current democratic
hope; but for those with disabilities, the historical journey has seldom represented a democratic
pursuit.
Legislation and litigation in the mid-to-late twentieth century instigated a progression of new
understandings about the way individuals with disabilities were perceived and valued then vs.
today. The shift to a socio-cultural/social justice movement has significantly changed the
landscape of special education, particularly the ideologies, philosophies, and practices that
influence specially designed instruction to those with disabilities. Utilizing disability studies,
among others, as frameworks for understanding the foundational role of deficit-thinking and
benevolence which commonly depicted special education’ historical underpinnings (Ferri, 2008) is
critical in our pursuit to forward asset-based thought in the field.
Course Objectives:
1. Candidates will analyze the shifting social and cultural constructions of disability from pre-1700
through the early twentieth century and from the mid- twentieth century to current day by
examining historical highlights.
2. Candidates will explore the philosophies, principles, theories, laws and policies that were
shaped by major federal legislation and litigation after 1960.
3. Candidates will critique the historical, social and cross-cultural foundations that frame our
response to disability today.
4. Candidates will discuss the distinction between the study of special education and disability
studies from a historical perspective on special education.
5. Candidates will research cross-cultural understandings of disability from a historical
perspective.
6. Candidates will critique and summarize the histories, legacies, and positionalities of society
that shaped contemporary institutional practice and its understanding of disability.
7. Candidates will explore and critique how inclusion has been operationalized and examine
factors related to inclusion and exclusion.
7
KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY’S CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK:
Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning and Leadership
Our vision as a nationally recognized Educator Preparation Program (EPP) is to remain at the
forefront of educator preparation. Informed by responsive engagement in collaborative
partnerships, we advance educational excellence through innovative teaching in an ever-changing
global and digital learning environment. Our mission is to prepare educators to improve student
learning within a collaborative teaching and learning community through innovative teaching,
purposeful research, and engaged service. The essence of our vision and mission is captured in
the theme Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning and Leadership which
was adopted in 2002 to express concisely the fundamental approach to educator preparation at
KSU.
The Educator Preparation Program (EPP) at Kennesaw State University is committed to
developing expertise among candidates in initial and advanced programs as teachers, teacher
leaders and school 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 to enhance the structures that support all learning. To that end, the EPP fosters
the development of candidates as they progress through stages of growth from novice to
proficient to expert and leader. Within the EPP conceptual framework, expertise is viewed as a
process of continued 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
EPP 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, local communities, public and private schools and school districts,
parents and other professional partners, the EPP meets the ultimate goal of bringing all of
Georgia’s 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, and 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 believes 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.
The knowledge base for methods of teaching students learning English continues to develop
rapidly. Current directions include multiple intelligence models, content-based instruction, and
L1/L2 approaches to teaching and learning. The field draws on research literature in the areas
of second language acquisition, bilingualism and cognition, L1/L2 literacy, and social justice.
EPP Diversity Statement
The KSU Educator Preparation Provider (EPP) believes all learners are entitled to equitable
educational opportunities. To that end, programs within the EPP consist of curricula, field
experiences, and clinical practice that promote candidates’ development of knowledge, skills, and
8
professional dispositions related to diversity identified in the unit’s conceptual framework,
including the local community, Georgia, the nation, and the world. Curricula and applied
experiences are based on well-developed knowledge foundations for, and conceptualizations of,
diversity and inclusion so that candidates can apply them effectively in schools. Candidates learn
to contextualize teaching and draw effectively on representations from the students’ own
experiences and cultures. They learn to collaborate and engage with families in ways that value the
resources, understandings, and knowledge that students bring from their home lives, communities
and cultures as assets to enrich learning opportunities. Candidates maintain high expectations for
all students (including English learners, students with exceptionalities and other historically
marginalized and underrepresented students), and support student success through research-based
culturally, linguistically, and socially relevant pedagogies and curricula.
Technology
Technology Standards & Use: 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, especially microcomputers, to assist teaching. They will master use of
productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, feel confident to design
multimedia instructional materials, and use various software. Library research required in this
course is supported by the Galileo system. D2L is a tool available to use for distance learning and
will also be the primary mode of communication, especially in case of weather related notices
regarding class. Course materials will be posted on D2L two to three weeks before they are
discussed in class.
Theoretical Framework for the Ed.D. & Ed.S. in Teaching Field Majors
Conceptual
Theoretical
Contextual
Learner
Practice
Informed pedagogical approaches arise from teachers’ critical understandings of
Theoretical/Conceptual, Contextual, and Practical/Applied influences on the learner. The belief
that all students can learn when the learner is the pedagogical core—promoted by Weimer
(2002)—is the foundation of this program. Within this learner-centered conceptual framework,
learners are embodied as P-16 students, pre-service candidates, teachers, teacher-leaders, and
school and district leaders and administrators, all of whom engage in a coherent, learner-centered
9
approach (Copland & Knapp, 2006). According to Lambert and McCombs (2000) and Alexander
and Murphy (2000), the confluence of Practical, Contextual, and Conceptual Critical
Understandings forms a lens for understanding Learner-Centered Psychological Principles.Within
the Education and Research Core and the Teaching Field Pedagogy core courses, the candidates
are introduced to key theories/concepts which are then examined according to the context of their
teaching situation addressing issues of grade level, diversity, and school type. The assessments of
the key theories/concepts in the courses, including formal and informal, are practical, which means
the candidates apply the theories/concepts in a practical situation, such as a 7th grade science
classroom.
VII. POLICIES:
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
Every KSU student is responsible for upholding the provisions of the Student Code of Conduct, as
published in the Undergraduate and Graduate Catalogs. Section II of the Student Code of Conduct
addresses the University's policy on academic honesty, including provisions regarding plagiarism
and cheating, unauthorized access to University materials, misrepresentation/falsification of
University records or academic work, malicious removal, retention, or destruction of library
materials, malicious/intentional misuse of computer facilities and/or services, and misuse of
student identification cards. Incidents of alleged academic misconduct will be handled through the
established procedures of the University Judiciary Program, which includes either an "informal"
resolution by a faculty member, resulting in a grade adjustment, or a formal hearing procedure,
which may subject a student to the Code of Conduct's minimum one semester suspension
requirement.
ATTENDANCE POLICY
The expectations for attending class are in accordance with the Graduate Catalogue. Regular
attendance is required for all scheduled classes in that the candidate is responsible for obtaining all
materials, instruction, etc. presented during class. Attendance at all class meetings (face-to-face,
synchronous, and asynchronous) is stressed because of the interactive nature of the class. As a
community of learners we are diminished if any one of us is absent. Not all material covered will
be found in the required readings. You are required to inform the instructor in advance of your
absence. Attendance will be monitored and reflected in the class participation/attendance points
(see KSU Graduate Catalog).
CANDIDATE EXPECTATIONS FOR ENGAGEMENT AND PARTICIPATION:
It is expected that candidates not only attend classes online and/or in person (face-to-face) depending
on the delivery mode of the class, but also contribute to discussion boards thoroughly prepared.
“Thoroughly prepared” is defined as having read the readings well enough to verbally and in writing
state the definitions of terms from the readings; discuss ideas, notions, concepts, issues, and
procedures in relation to previous information presented in class, online, or in previous readings; and
apply the information from the readings to problems. It also implies the candidate has reviewed
information from the previous class meetings. When information from the readings is unclear, the
candidate should prepare questions to discuss in class. In addition, group members can ask candidates
who are not contributing equally to the development of the presentation to be removed from their
group.
Various cooperative learning group activities - in class and online - will enable candidates to apply
10
new skills and knowledge. Each candidate has something unique to contribute to the class
experience that will facilitate the learning of other class members. For full credit, candidates must
demonstrate professionalism by:
a) Participating fully in collaborative group work and focus groups
b) Practicing active listening during presentations
c) Refraining from working on other assignments during class presentations (or checking
email)
All assignments must be submitted on or before the class meeting on the assigned due date. All
grading will be done as objectively as possible. Rubrics will be provided for class presentations,
postings, facilitation, and projects. In case of qualitative assessment, evaluation will be based on
instructor judgment. Points will be cumulative and final course grades will be based on the percent
of total points earned (i.e., A = 100 - 90%, B = 89 - 80%, etc.).
DISRUPTIVE BEHAVIOR
The University has a stringent policy and procedure for dealing with behavior that disrupts the
learning environment. Consistent with the belief that your behavior can interrupt the learning of
others, behavior that fits the University's definition of disruptive behavior will not be tolerated.
Candidates should refer to the University Catalog to review this policy.
HUMAN RELATIONS
The University has formulated a policy on human relations that is intended to provide a learning
environment that recognizes individual worth. That policy is found in the University Catalog. It is
expected, in this class, that no Professional should need reminding but the policy is there for your
consideration. The activities of this class will be conducted in both the spirit and the letter of that
policy.
VIII. COURSE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this course are consistent with the
EPP Advanced Proficiencies, EDD/EDS program standards, and SPED EDD/EDS program standards.
EDD Performance Outcome
SPED EDD/EDS Objectives
1. Candidates foster a
responsive, learner-centered
educational environment
that promotes collaboration
and democratic
participation for student
learning and may include
co-teaching.
Candidates apply a critical
lens to collaboration among
key stakeholders to promote
equitable practices within
culturally responsive and
sustaining educational
contexts leading to
improved outcomes for all
learners.
2. Candidates demonstrate
pedagogical approaches
which incorporate
contextual,
theoretical/conceptual, and
Course Objective
Candidates will discuss
the distinction between
the study of special
education and disability
studies from a historical
Knowledge,
Skills
Dispositions
(Advanced
CPI)
2.1 (D)
2.2 (K;S;D)
2.3 (K;S)
2.4 (K;S)
2.5 (K;S)
2.6 (K;S)
1.2 (K;S)
1.3 (K;S)
1.4 (K;S;D)
2.1 - 2.6
(K;S;D)
Activities, Coursework,
Assignments & Key
Assessment
Historical and Cultural
Timeline with Objective
Commentary Paper
Personal Historical and
11
practical influences on the
learner and learning.
3. Candidates advance
teaching and learning
through the innovative use
of technology based on
sound educational theory
and knowledge of the
learner.
4. Candidates demonstrate indepth foundational
knowledge of content-based
research, scholarship, and
socio-political influences in
the teaching field and use
this knowledge to analyze
and interpret problems and
implement solutions within
their profession.
5. Candidates demonstrate and
apply various types of
assessment to inform the
learner’s ability to analyze,
monitor, and improve their
learning as well as interpret
and use data to inform their
own pedagogical
effectiveness.
6. Candidates engage in
scholarly, applied research
to advance knowledge of
teaching, the learner, and/or
learning.
perspective on special
education.
Cultural Timeline with
Commentary Paper
Also:
Candidates will critique
the historical, social and
cross-cultural
foundations that frame
our response to
disability today.
Also:
Candidates will explore
the philosophies,
principles, theories,
laws and policies that
were shaped by major
federal legislation and
litigation after 1960.
Critical Analysis of
Disability within Historical,
Social, Political, or Cultural
Product or Event
Reflective Writing on
Reading Assignments
1.2 (K;S)
2.1 – 2.6
(K;S;D)
2.4 (K;S)
Candidates demonstrate an
understanding of how
historical legacies,
legislation, and litigation
have served to both include
and segregate students with
disabilities and utilize this
knowledge to serve as
change agents within
educational and community
settings.
Candidates will analyze
the shifting social and
cultural constructions of
disability from pre1700 through the early
twentieth century and
from the mid- twentieth
century to current day
by examining historical
highlights.
1.1 (K)
1.2 (K;S)
3.1 (K;D)
3.2 (K;D)
3.3 (D)
3.4 (D)
3.5 (D)
Historical and Cultural
Timeline with Objective
Commentary Paper
Personal Historical and
Cultural Timeline with
Commentary Paper
(Assessment)
Reflective Writing on
Reading Assignments
Also: Candidates will
critique and summarize
the histories, legacies,
and positionalities of
society that shaped
contemporary
institutional practice
and its understanding of
disability.
2.4 (K;S)
2.5 (K;S)
3.2 (K;D)
Candidates engage in
inquiry based learning as
both consumer and
producer of research.
Drawing from theoretical
and conceptual frameworks
in educational research they
apply these theories to their
Candidates will explore
and critique how
inclusion has been
operationalized and
examine factors related
to inclusion and
exclusion.
3.2 (K;D)
3.5 (D)
Critical Analysis of
Disability within
Historical, Social, Political,
or Cultural Product or
Event
Reflective Writing on
Reading Assignments
12
practice and develop
alternative critical
pedagogies to provide
socially just schooling for all
students.
7. Candidates reflect on their
professional, scholarly
practice, and analyze the
ways in which they have
changed in their thinking,
beliefs, or behaviors toward
improved learner-centered
practices.
Candidates are
knowledgeable of critical
issues within the field of
special/education and
engage in critical reflection,
which involves taking an
inquiry stance, relating
theory to practice, stating an
argument and supporting it
with evidence, making
comparisons and evaluating
their own positionalities and
epistemologies.
8. Candidates support
academic and linguistic
needs of the learner,
enhance cultural
understandings, and
increase global awareness
of all students.
Candidates move beyond a
culturally responsive
framework by adopting a
reflexive multicultural
approach that validates and
sustains the cultural identity
of learners.
9. Candidates demonstrate
professional dispositions,
fluency of academic
language in a variety of
contexts, , and ethical
practice expected of an
engaged scholarpractitioner.
10.
3.2 (K;D)
Candidates will
research cross-cultural
understandings of
disability from a
historical perspective.
1.4 (K;S;D)
2.1 – 2.6
(K;S;D)
Critical Analysis of
Disability within
Historical, Social, Political,
or Cultural Product or
Event
Reflective Writing on
Reading Assignments
1.4(K;D)
2.1 (D)
2.2 (K;S;D)
3.1 – 3.5
(K;D)
Candidates employ a critical
lens to dismantle,
reconfigure, and construct
equitable educational
institutions by identifying
and challenging power and
ideology in teaching
practices, curricular
materials, and education
reform efforts.
Course Goals #2, #4,
and #6
13
IX. COURSE REQUIREMENTS & ASSIGNMENTS
1.
Historical and Cultural Timeline with Objective Commentary Paper. You will
construct a historical and cultural timeline that includes human rights legislation and
litigation, as well as cultural and social constructs and political, legal, and ethical
issues. You will also be required to write an objective commentary to accompany
your timeline.
2.
Critical Analysis of Disability within Historical, Social, Political, or Cultural
Product or Event. You will critically examine one historical, social, political, or
cultural product or event that includes representation(s) of disability. You may draw
on literature, research, media, documentaries, or artistic portrayals. Be sure to relate
your analysis to course readings and sterling outside sources.
3.
Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary Paper. This assignment
will reflect a history-in-person/self-context approach. It is similar to the Historical
and Cultural Timeline with Commentary assignment; however, it will include your
personal reflections and critique of major events within the timeline that have
particular significance to your life. NOTE: This assignment is a Key Assessment
within the program.
4.
Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments. You will periodically be assigned to
reflect on assigned readings about past and present issues in special education from a
historical perspective. You will review/reflect upon salient points of the work and the
particular critical perspective which it elucidates. Author intent, as well as social,
cultural, pedagogical, and ethical implications for diverse learners will be addressed.
X. EVALUATION & GRADING
Assignments/Assessments
Points
Historical and Cultural Timeline with Objective Commentary Paper
30
Critical Analysis of Disability within Historical, Social, Political, or
Cultural Product or Event
30
Personal Historical and Cultural Timeline with Commentary Paper
30
Reflective Writing on Reading Assignments
10
Total Points
100
14
Numeric Scale:
A = 90-100%
B = 80-89%
C = 70-79%
D = 60-69%
F = below 60
XII. COURSE OUTLINE
What follows is a tentative schedule (subject to change with notice). Course requirements
and homework assignments are indicated on the chart below, but the weekly agendas will
provide the specific due dates.
Class Session
1.
Topic
Assignment/Reading for
Next Week
Assignment Due
Danforth, The Incomplete
Child. Ch. 1, 2, 4-6.
Reflective
Writing
Assignment #1
Due
Welcome
Orientation to Course and Review of
Syllabus
Looking at the Readings
Overview of Historical, Social and
Cultural Foundations of Special
Education
2.
Shifting Social and Cultural
Constructions of Disability: The
Leading Gatekeepers
Winzer, A History of
Special Education in the
20th Century: From
Integration to Inclusion.
Ch. 1-3.
3.
Histories, Legacies & Positionalities
that Shaped Contemporary
Practice/Discrimination Across the
Lifespan
View Video - Bell, L.A.
(2013). 40 Years
Later…Now Can We
Talk?
Outline for
Historical &
Cultural
Timeline and
Commentary
Due
15
4.
The Study of Disability and Disability
Studies
Ferri, Reimagining Special
Education from a
Disability Studies
Perspective.
Small and Large
Group
Reflections
Reflective
Writing
Assignment #2
Due
5.
Beyond Separate Education
Lipsky & Gartner, Beyond
Separate Education. Ch.
1-7.
Reflective
Writing
Assignment #3
Due
Walberg, Wang &
Reynolds: The Necessary
Restructuring of Special
Education.
6.
Major Transformations within General
Education and Special Education
Winzer, A History of
Special Education in the
20th Century: From
Integration to Inclusion.
Ch. 4-6.
Historical &
Cultural
Timeline and
Commentary
Due
7.
Advocacy: Continuing to Break Down
Barriers
Winzer, A History of
Special Education in the
20th Century: From
Integration to Inclusion.
Ch. 7-9.
Reflective
Writing
Assignment #4
Due
Lipsky & Gartner, Beyond
Separate Education. Ch.
10-14
8.
Critical Analysis of Historical
Perspectives
Mississippi Burning
(excerpts)
Small and Large
Group
Reflection &
Analysis
Outline for
Critical Analysis
Project Due
9.
Critical Analysis of Historical
Perspectives
Gloria Ladsen-Billings’
2004 AERA Presidential
Address, 50 Years Since
Brown v. Board of
Reflective
Writing
Assignment #5
16
Education
Due
10.
Embracing an Inquiry Stance:
Intersection of social class, ethnicity,
race, academic & linguistic ability &
gender
Cochran-Smith,
Inside/outside (select
chapters)
Outline for
Personal
Historical and
Cultural
Timeline with
Commentary
Paper Due
11.
Embracing an Inquiry Stance:
Intersection of social class, ethnicity,
race, academic & linguistic ability &
gender
Starratt, Ethical
Leadership (select
chapters)
Critical Analysis
Project Due
12.
How Far Have We Really Come? The
Overrepresentation of African
American Males in Special Education
Guest Speaker
Small and Large
Group
Reflection &
Analysis
13.
Presentation of Personal Historical &
Cultural Timelines
Final Presentations
Personal
Historical and
Cultural
Timeline Due
14.
Presentation of Personal Historical &
Cultural Timelines
Final Presentations
Personal
Historical and
Cultural
Timeline
Commentary
Paper Due
17