KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet
(10/02/2002)
Course Number/Program Name EDL 9325/Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership
Department Educational Leadership
Degree Title (if applicable) Doctor of Education
Proposed Effective Date August 1, 2006.
Check one or more of the following and complete the appropriate sections:
X New Course Proposal
Course Title Change
Course Number Change
Course Credit Change
Course Prerequisite Change
Course Description Change
Sections to be Completed
II, III, IV, V, VII
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
I, II, III
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:
Faculty Member
_____
Date
Not Approved Approved
Approved Not Approved
Department Curriculum Committee Date
Department Chair Date
Not Approved Approved
Approved
Approved
Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
School Curriculum Committee Date
School Dean Date
GPCC Chair
Dean, Graduate Studies
Date
Date
Approved
Approved
Not Approved
Not Approved
Vice President for Academic Affairs Date
President Date

KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE / CONCENTRATION/PROGRAM CHANGE
I. Current Information (Fill in for changes)
Page Number in Current Catalog
Course Prefix and Number
Course Title
Credit Hours
Prerequisites
Description (or Current Degree Requirements)
II. Proposed Information (Fill in for changes and new courses)
Course Prefix and Number _EDL 9325 ______ ________________
Course Title ____ Politics of Education_____________
Credit Hours 3
Prerequisites Admission to EDD Program or Permission of Instructor
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements)
This course focuses on educational governance and politics at the federal, state and local levels that impact on the operation of public and private educational systems. Historical, social and cultural influences shaping political decisions will be examined.
III. Justification
The purpose of this course is to prepare candidates to be a far-sighted educational planners and administrators in a world of politics. Understanding the political forces that impact on school systems helps school administrators make wiser decisions.

IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor: To be determined.
Text:
Spring, J. (1997). Conflicts of interest: The politics of American education . Highstown,
NJ: McGraw-Hill
Prerequisites: Admission to EDD Program or Permission of Instructor
Objectives:
The following course objectives are derived:
1.
Candidates will understand the key political processes as they apply to education: policy,
power, and conflict.
2.
Candidates will understand the cultural/social/ political issues that impact American education.
3.
Candidates will examine the impact of political decisions on curriculum and instruction.
4.
Candidates will understand the nature of the accountability movement and how it relates to educational administration.
5.
Candidates will learn strategies that work for the best benefit of the schools in the political entanglement .
Course objective understand the key political processes as they apply to education: policy, power, and conflict.
understand the cultural/social/ political issues that
Doctoral KSDs Distributed School
Leadership Roles*
1b Learning & Development
1c
Leader
Change Leader
Change Leader impact American education examine the impact of political decisions on curriculum and instruction understand the nature of the accountability movement and how it relates to educational administration.
1c, 2b
4b
Change Leader
Operations Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
PSC/NCATE
Standard
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
1.6
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7
1.3,1.4, 1.5,
1.7

learn strategies that work for the best benefit of the schools in the political entanglement .
4a Change Leader
Performance Leader
Operations Leader
1.6
Instructional Method:
Course method will include, but are not limited to:
1.
2.
3.
Lecture
Presentations
Student research projects
Class exercises
4.
Method of Evaluation:
5. Class and group discussions
6. Guest speakers
7. Simulations
8. Case studies
1.
2.
First Exercise 15%
Review of literature 15%
4. Interview with administrators 15%
5. Group presentation 20%
20% 3. Second Exercise 15% 6. Case study
Grades will be based on the following criteria:
90% to 100% Grade A 60% to 69% Grade D
80% to 89% Grade B
70% to 79% Grade C
59% or below Grade F
V. Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
Amount Resource
Faculty
Other Personnel
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
New Books
New Journals
Other (Specify)
TOTAL
Funding Required Beyond
Normal Departmental Growth

* The resources and funding of this course are figured in as part of the budget of the entire college wide Doctor of Education Program. Please see attached Program Budget
Sheet.

V.
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 16 spaces)
CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS
Approval, Effective Term
Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U)
Educational Leadership
EDL 9325
Politics of Education
3__________________________________
August 1, 2006.
Regular
N.A. If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
Learning Support Programs courses which are
required as prerequisites N.A.
APPROVED:
________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __

VII Attach Syllabus

EDL 9325 Politics of Education
Department of Educational Leadership
Kennesaw State University
_____________Semester, 20___.
Instructor : Name
Rank
Address
Phone Number (office)
FAX: (770) 423-6910
E-mail:
Class Session : Day and time
Room Number
Semester Hours : 3
Prerequisites: Admission to EDD Program or Permission of Instructor
Text (required):
Spring, J. (1997). Conflicts of interest: The politics of American education . Highstown, NJ: McGraw-Hill
Referenced Journals: School Business Affairs
American Schools and Universities
Educational Facility Planner
Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis
Educational Planning
American School Board Journal
Executive Educator
NASSP Bulletin
Educational Leadership
Principal
Catalog Description :
This course focuses on educational governance and politics at the federal, state and local levels that impact on the operation of public and private educational systems. Historical, social and cultural influences shaping political decisions will be examined.
Purpose/Rationale:
The purpose of this course is to prepare candidates to be a far-sighted educational planners and administrators
in a world of politics. Understanding the political forces that impact on school systems helps school administrators make wiser decisions.

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 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.
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, especially microcomputers, to assist teaching.
They will master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel confident to design multimedia instructional materials, create WWW resources, and develop an electronic learning portfolio.
Diversity Statement
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.
Statement for school-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.
Doctorate of Education (EdD)
The knowledge, skills and dispositions (KSD’s) of the graduates of the The Kennesaw State University
Doctorate of Education program of the Bagwell College of Education reflect the unique aspects of this degree. Collaboratively developed by faculty from across the university and in consultation with community/school partners, these outcomes and proficiencies delineate the high expectations we have for graduates who will be Leaders for Learning. Clearly, the proficiencies reflect the complex nature of student learning in advanced degree programs leading to a terminal degree. Consequently, many of the proficiencies listed below incorporate aspects of knowledge, skills and dispositions within a single proficiency. These proficiencies are clearly linked to our conceptual framework, The Collaborative
Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning and Leadership.
Graduates from the Doctorate of Education Program at Kennesaw State University
1. Demonstrate leadership as advocates for students and education. Candidates a. synthesize and apply the latest research on learning, leadership, developmental theory advocating the implementation of best practices and assist colleagues to do the same to ensure all students learn. b. are knowledgeable, articulate and think critically about educational practice, policy and issues on national and international arenas. c. understand, respond to , and influence the larger political, social, economic, legal, and cultural context in matters related to education.
2. Demonstrate leadership as agents for change, collaboration and collegiality. Candidates a. understand the complexity of schools and the ambiguous nature of educational issues. b. act in concert with and/or on behalf of colleagues to improve teaching and learning in the classroom as supported by effective school, district, state level policies and operations. c. facilitate shared-decision making and teamwork. d. improve teaching and learning by intentionally and systematically building networks of influence at local, state, national and international arenas. e. impact student learning for all and mentor other educators to do the same by effectively working within the structures and culture of schools, families and communities.

3. Demonstrate leadership as mentors. Candidates a. support and guide teachers to improve teaching and learning for all. b. are committed to improving student learning by improving teaching and the learning environment. c. model routine, intentional, and effective use of technology while mentori8ng and encouraging others to do the same.
4. Demonstrate leadership as expert teachers and instructional leaders. Candidates a. are creative and flexible in their thinking and in seeking solutions to educational challenges. b. are knowledgeable of assessment, evaluation and accountability practices and critically synthesize and utilize the data to improve student learning. c. are master-teachers and instructional leaders possessing and demonstrating content and pedagogical expertise who are able to make international comparisons in both areas. d. develop and/or support appropriate, meaningful curricula that positively impact student learning for all and assist others to do the same. e. facilitate and support curricular design, instructional strategies, and learning environments that integrate appropriate technologies to maximize teaching and learning. f. use technology to collect and analyze data, interpret results, and communicate findings to improve instructional practice and student learning.
5. Demonstrate leadership as models of professionalism. Candidates a. effectively design and conduct educational research which positively influences educational practice or policy. b. exhibit ethical behavior in all professional and personal interactions. c. respect others, value differences and are open to feedback. d. believe that for every problem there is a solution and actualize that belief when engaging colleagues, students, families and community partners. e. seek out responsibility and are accountable for their actions. f. maintain current knowledge and best practices through continued professional development.
6. Demonstrate leadership in meeting the needs of diverse constituents. Candidates a. value and recognize the strength and power of diversity. b. incorporate global perspectives and cultural richness in curriculum planning and decision making. c. address exceptionalities in planning, teaching, and assessment and respond to diverse community interests and needs by mobilizing community resources. d. proactively and intentionally advocate for and work to build educational environments that are inclusive and supportive of diverse students, families and colleagues.

Course Objectives:
The objectives of this course are developed as follows:
Candidates will
1.
Course objective understand the key political processes as they apply to education: policy, power, and conflict.
understand the cultural/social/ political issues that
Doctoral KSDs Distributed School
Leadership Roles*
1b Learning & Development
Leader
Change Leader
1c Change Leader impact American education examine the impact of political decisions on curriculum and instruction administration.
understand the nature of the accountability movement and how it relates to educational learn strategies that work for the best benefit of the schools in the political entanglement .
1c, 2b
4b
4a
Change Leader
Operations Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
Relationship Development
Leader
Data Analysis Leader
Curriculum, Instruction &
Assessment Leader
Process Improvement
Leader
Change Leader
Performance Leader
Operations Leader
PSC/NCATE
Standard
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
1.6
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7
1.3,1.4, 1.5,
1.7
1.6
Course Outline :
The contents of this course are outlined as follows:
1.
Purposes of education, public expectation, and political mandates
2.
Educational economics and political control
3.
Educational politics at the local, state and federal levels.
4.
Political impact of professional and special interest groups
5.
Social structure and schooling
6.
School accountability movement
7.
Community investment in education
8.
Politics and student learning
9.
Responses of school administrators to educational politics.
Course activities :
Course activities will include, but are not limited to:

1.
2.
3.
4.
Lecture
Student research projects
Class exercises
Presentations
Course requirements :
5. Class and group discussions
6. Guest speakers
7. Simulations
8. Case studies
1.
2.
3.
Full class attendance is anticipated.
Active participation in activities is expected.
Review of literature (10 articles)
A group project is presented. 4.
5.
6.
7.
Composition of a case study is required.
Interview with school administrators
Student performance evaluation :
1.
First Exercise 15%
2.
Review of literature 15%
3.
Second Exercise 15%
4.
5.
6.
Interview with administrators
Group presentation
Case study
Grades will be based on the following criteria:
90% to 100% Grade A
80% to 89% Grade B
70% to 79% Grade C
Academic Integrity Expectations :
60% to 69% Grade D
59% or below Grade F
Page 116 of the KSU Graduate catalog (2000-2001) states: 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.
(from current KSU Student Handbook)
Bibliography :
15%
20%
20%
Hess, F. M. (1999). Spinning wheels: The politics of urban school reform . Washington, DC: The
Brookings Institution.
Klein, M. F. (Ed.) (1991). The politics of curriculum decision-making: Issues in centralizing the curriculum .
Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
Merseth, K. K. (1997). Cases in educational administration . New York, NY: Longman.
Morken, H., & Formicola, J. R. (1999). The politics of school choice . Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
Scribner, J. D., & Layton, D. H. (1994). The study of educational politics . The 1994 commemorative yearbook of the Politics of Education Association (1969-1994). Washington, DC: Falmer.
Sergiovanni, T. J., Kelleher, P., McCarthy, M. M., & Wirt, F. M. (2004). Educational governance and

administration.
Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward Utopia: A century of public school reform . Boston,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Wirt, F. M., & Kirst, M. W. (2001). The political dynamics of American education (2 nd ed.). Washington,
DC: McCutchan Publishing.