KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION, Cover Sheet (10/02/2002) Course Number/Program Name ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law on the Classroom Department Elementary and Early Childhood Education Degree Title (if applicable) Education Doctorate (Ed.D.) Proposed Effective Date Fall 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 Approved _____ Date Not Approved Department Curriculum Committee Date Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Approved Not Approved Department Chair Date School Curriculum Committee Date School Dean Date GPCC Chair Date Dean, Graduate Studies Date Not Approved Not Approved Not Approved Not Approved Not Approved Vice President for Academic Affairs Date Approved Not Approved President Date Page 1 of 13 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 ECE 8140 _____________________ Course Title _Impact of Current School Law on the Classroom Credit Hours 3 Prerequisites Acceptance to the Ed.D. program Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements) This course will present current content about law and legal principles that apply to schools. Careful examination of issues related to the impact of current law on the classroom will be studied III. Justification As our society becomes more litigious, it is important that teachers understand educational laws and the impact these laws have on educational decisions. Teachers who become leaders for learning must not only know curriculum but also become legally-literate. Opportunities to be effective school leaders occur throughout the day as teachers share experiences, collaborate about teaching and learning or simply ask questions of each other. It is through these opportunities that distributed school leadership becomes a powerful force in our educational system. These teacher leaders must be well versed in the laws and impact of laws on the schools IV. Additional Information (for New Courses only) Instructor: Text: American Psychological Association, Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, (5th ed) Washington, DC: Author Alexander, K & Alexander M. D. (2001) American Public School Law (5th). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Fischer, Schimmel, & Stellman (2003) Teachers and the Law (6th). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. LaMorte, M. W. (2002). School Law: Cases and concepts (7th). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Page 2 of 13 Prerequisites: Admission to the Ed.D. program Objectives: Course objectives Doctoral KSDS 1c Distributed School Leadership Roles Change Leader, PSC/NCATE Standard 1.6 2. become aware of the conflicting views about legal policies and practices 1b, 1c Learning & Development Leader, Change Leader 1.4, 1.5, 1.6 3 develop knowledge about law and legal principles that apply to schools 4. gain insights into the level of public school teachers knowledge of legal issues 1c Change Leader, 1.6 1b, 1c. Learning & Development Leader, Change Leader 1.4, 1.5, 1.6 5. become an active agent of change to enhance teacher knowledge of educational legal issues 1b, 1c, 2e Learning & Development Leader, Change Leader, Learning & Development Leader, Process Improvement Leader, Performance Leader 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8 1. develop sensitivity to the legal aspects of education Instructional Method Lecture Class Discussions Group and Individual Work Use of Technology Peer Evaluation Method of Evaluation Individual Assignment Write a position paper about one educational law currently in place--100 points (CPI ) Identify and discuss five of the school laws that have the most impact on your classroom teaching--100 points (CPI ) Analysis and Synthesis of survey of teacher’ current educational legal knowledge-100 points (CPI) Identify and write a paper of realistic ways to expand teachers’ knowledge of legal issues--100 points (CPI ) Page 3 of 13 Group Assignment Contribute quality content to large/small group discussions S/U Develop and administer a survey to examine teacher’s current knowledge of educational law 100 points (CPI) Exploration and oral discussion of 2 current educational laws not presented in class—S/U Three points will be subtracted from the final average for each “U” received. A: B: C: F: V. 92% - 100% 84% - 91% 75% - 83% 75% or lower Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only) *Course funding is addressed in a comprehensive manner in the comprehensive proposal for the umbrella Ed.D degree for the Bagwell College of Education. Resource Amount Faculty Other Personnel Equipment Supplies Travel New Books New Journals Other (Specify) TOTAL Funding Required Beyond Normal Departmental Growth 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 16 spaces) CLASS-LAB-CREDIT HOURS Approval, Effective Term Grades Allowed (Regular or S/U) EECE ECE 8140 School Law 3 Fall 2006 Regular Page 4 of 13 If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas? Learning Support Programs courses which are required as prerequisites APPROVED: ________________________________________________ Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee VII Attach Syllabus Page 5 of 13 Elementary and Early Childhood Education ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law on the Classroom Kennesaw State University Bagwell College of Education Department of Elementary and Early Childhood Education Semester, Fall, 2006 I. ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law on the Classroom II. INSTRUCTOR: to be assigned Kennesaw Hall Room xxx Office Phone- xxxxx e-mail xxxxx III. CLASS MEETINGS: TBA IV: TEXTS selection that could be chosen for ECE 8xxx Assessment of Learning) American Psychological Association, Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association, (5th ed) Washington, DC: Author Alexander, K & Alexander M. D. (2001) American Public School Law (5th). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. Fischer, Schimmel, & Stellman (2003) Teachers and the Law (6th). Boston: Allyn & Bacon LaMorte, M. W. (2002). School Law: Cases and concepts (7th). Boston: Allyn & Bacon. Website http://spirit.sparklist.com/cgi-bin/1yris.pl?join=legalclips Also you will need to bring an APA Style Manual (hard copy or CD) and computer disks to class everyday. Those students who own laptop computers should bring those to class, too. V. CATALOG COURSE DESCRIPTIONS: ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law in the Classroom This course will present current content about law and legal principles that apply to schools. Careful examination of issues related to the impact of current law on the classroom will be studied. VI. PURPOSE/RATIONALE: As our society becomes more litigious, it is important that teachers understand educational laws and the impact these laws have on educational decisions. Teachers who become leaders for learning must not only know curriculum but also become legally-literate. Opportunities to be effective school leaders occur throughout the day as teachers share experiences, collaborate about teaching and learning or simply ask questions of each other. It is through these opportunities that distributed school leadership becomes a powerful force in our educational system. These teacher leaders must be well versed in the laws and impact of laws on the schools. Page 6 of 13 CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK SUMMARY 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 endstate. 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 at the doctoral level develop into leaders for learning and 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, inservice, 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 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 VII. Course Objectives: ECE 8140 Impact of Current School Law in the Classroom Course objectives Doctoral KSDS 1. develop sensitivity to the legal aspects of education 1c Distributed School Leadership Roles Change Leader, PSC/NCATE Standard 1.6 2. become aware of the conflicting views about legal policies and practices 1b, 1c Learning & Development Leader, Change Leader 1.4, 1.5, 1.6 3 develop knowledge about law and legal principles that apply to schools 1c Change Leader, 1.6 4. gain insights into the level of public school teachers knowledge of legal issues 1b, 1c. Learning & Development 1.4, 1.5, 1.6 Page 7 of 13 Leader, Change Leader 5. become an active agent of change to enhance teacher knowledge of educational legal issues 1b, 1c, 2e Learning & Development Leader, Change Leader, Learning & Development Leader, Process Improvement Leader, Performance Leader Georgia's Leadership Institute for School Improvement & Georgia Committee on Educational Leadership Preparation’s Distributed School Leadership Roles COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND ASSIGNMENTS: Individual Assignment Write a position paper about one educational law currently in place--100 points (CPI ) Identify and discuss five of the school laws that have the most impact on your classroom teaching-100 points (CPI ) Analysis and Synthesis of survey of teacher’ current educational legal knowledge--100 points (CPI) Identify and write a paper of realistic ways to expand teachers’ knowledge of legal issues--100 points (CPI ) Group Assignment Contribute quality content to large/small group discussions S/U Develop and administer a survey to examine teacher’s current knowledge of educational law 100 points (CPI) Exploration and oral discussion of 2 current educational laws not presented in class—S/U Three points will be subtracted from the final average for each “U” received. VIII. EVALUATION AND GRADING: Grading: 93-100% 85-92 % A B 77-84% C 69-76% D <69% F IX. Policies Page 8 of 13 1.4, 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 1.8 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. Professionalism- Academic Honesty: KSU expects that graduate students will pursue their academic programs in an ethical, professional manner. Faculty of the EdS and EdD programs abide by the policies and guidelines established by the university in their expectations for candidates’ work. Candidates are responsible for knowing and adhering to the guidelines of academic honesty as stated in the graduate catalog. Any candidate who is found to have violated these guidelines will be subject to disciplinary action consistent with university policy. For example, plagiarism or other violations of the University’s Academic Honesty policies could result in a grade of “F” in the course and a formal hearing before the Judiciary Committee. Professionalism- Participation and Attendance: Part of your success in this class is related to your ability to provide peer reviews and feedback to your editing groups regarding their research and their writing. Furthermore, responding effectively and appropriately to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s professionalism. In addition, since each class meeting represents a week of instruction/learning, failure to attend class will likely impact your performance on assignments and final exams. Please be prepared with all readings completed prior to class. We depend on one another to ask pertinent and insightful questions. X. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY Court-Ordered Desegregation Charles Ogletree, All Deliberate Speed (2004) (Selected Pages) – I, 347 U.S. 483 (1954) Brown v. Board of Education of Topeka – II, 349 U.S. 294 (1955) Swann v. Charlotte-Mecklenburg Board of Education, 402 U.S. 1 (1970) Memorandum Decision and Order, San Francisco NAACP v. SFUSD (October 2001) Amy Stuart Wells, Jennifer Jellison Holme, Anita Tijerina Revilla, and Awo Korantemaa Atanda, “How Desegregation Changes Us: The Effects of Racially Mixed Schools on Students and Society,” drawn from forthcoming book (2006) In Search of Brown. Louisville,” from Diversity Challenged, (Gary Orfield, ed.) (2001) Page 9 of 13 Voluntary Desegregation Regents of the University of California v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265 (1978) th Eisenberg v. Montgomery County Public Schools, 197 F.3d 123 (4 Cir. 1999) Hunter v. Regents of the University of California, 190 F.3d 1061 (9th Cir. 1999) Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) Brief of Amici Curiae American Council on Education, Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) Brief of Amici Curiae Lt. Gen. Julius W. Becton, Jr. et al., Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003) st Comfort v. Lynn School Committee, 2005 WL 1404464 (1 Cir. 2005) Brief of Amici Curiae for the Council of the Great City Schools, et al. Comfot v. Lynn (2003) Melanie Killen, "Developmental Psychology and the Argument for School Desegregation," SRCD Developments: The Society for Research in Childhood Newsletter (January, 2003). "School Choice: Doing it the Right Way Makes a Difference," The Brookings Institution (November 2003). Richard Kahlenberg, “Chapter 4: The Significance of the Socioeconomic Makeup of Schools” & “Chapter 6: How Socioeconomic Integration Can Be Achieved in Practice,” from All Together Now (2001). “Closing the Gap: Moving From Rhetoric to Reality,” NAACP Legal Defense Fund (June 23, 2005) FERPA Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), 20 U.S.C. § 1232(g) th United Staes of Ameica v. Miami University, 294 F.3d 797 (6 t r Cir. 2002) Burt v. Rumsfeld, 354 F.Supp.2d 156 (D.Conn 2005) The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title IX, Part D, Sec. 9528 Policy Guidance: Access to High School Students and Information on Students by Military Recruiters (October 9, 2002) Joint DOE/DOD letter to Chief State Officers About LEA Release of Information to Military Recruiters (July 2, 2003). DOE Letter to Superintendents on FERPA (January 2004) (including commentary on requirements for the release of information to military recruiters). The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title I � The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title I Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now v. New York City Department of Education, 269 F.Supp.2d 338 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) Kegerreis v. United States of America, 2003 WL 22327188 (D.Kan. 2003) “Public School Choice: Non-Regulatory Guidance,” U.S. Department of Education (February 6, 2004) High-Stakes Testing Debra P. v. Turlington, 644 F.2d 397 (5th Cir. 1981) Board of Education of Northport-East Northport Union Free School District v. Ambach, 436 N.Y.S.2d 564 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1981) Triplett v. Livingston County Board of Education, 967 S.W.2d 25 (Ky. Ct. App. 1997) GI Forum, Image de Tejas v. Texas Education Agency, 87 F.Supp.2d 667 (W.D. Tex. 2000) Student No. 9 v. Board of Education, 802 N.E.2d 105 (Mass. 2004) The Use of Tests as Part of High-Stakes Decision-Making for Students: A Resource Guide for Educators and Policy-Makers, U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights, (December 2000) Racial Harassment Raad v. Fairbanks North Star Borough School District, 323 F.3d 1185 (9th Cir. 2003) Virginia v. Black, 123 S.Ct. 1536 (2003) Page 10 of 13 Investigative Guidance on Racial Incidents and Harassment Against Students at Educational Institutions, Department of Education's Office for Civil Rights, Federal Register, 59 FR 11,448 (March 10, 1994) Regulations for Title VI of the CRA1964, 65 FR 68,050 (November 13, 2000). Gender-Based Decision Making Title IX U.S. v. Virginia, 518 U.S. 515 (1996) Chipman v. Grant County School District, 30 F.Supp.2d 975 (1998) Jackson v. Birmingham Board of Education, 125 S.Ct. 1497 (2005). The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Section 5131 Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education, “Guidelines on Current Title IX Requirements Related to Single-Sex Classes and Schools” (2002). “Additional Clarification of Intercollegiate Athletics Policy: Three Part Test – Part Three” (Additional Clarification), Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education (March 17, 2005). 34 CFR Part 106: Nondiscrimination on the Basis of Sex in Education Programs or Activities Receiving Federal Financial Assistance; Proposed Rules, Office for Civil Rights, Department of Education, (March 9, 2004). The Secretary of Education’s Commission on Opportunity in Athletics, “Open to All: Title IX at Thirty” (executive summary) (February 28, 2003) Sexual Orientation Romer v. Evans, 116 S.Ct. 1620 (1996) Williamson v. A.G. Edwards and Sons, Inc., 876 F.2d 69 (8th Cir.1989) Wrightson v. Pizza Hut of America, Inc., 99 F.3d 138 (4th Cir. 1996) Oncale v. Sundowner Offshore Services, 523 U.S. 75 (1998) Schroeder v. Hamilton School District, 282 F.3d 946 (7th Cir. 2002) Flores v. Morgan Hill Unified School District, 324 F.3d 1130 (9th Cir. 2003) Boy Scouts of America v. Dale, 530 U.S. 640 (2000) Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003) The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Section 9525 Sexual Harassment Title VII Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. Vinson, 477 U.S. 57 (1986) Gebser v. Lago Vista Independent School District, 524 U. First Amendment: Religion Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 US 205, (1972) Employment Division v. Smith, 494 US 872 (1990) Lee v. Weisman, 505 U.S. 577 (1992) Agostini v. Felton, 117 S.Ct. 1997 (1997) Mitchell v. Helms, 530 U.S. 793 (2000) Santa Fe Independent School District v. Doe, 530 U.S. 290 (2000) Good News Club v. Milford, 533 U.S. 98 (2001) Brown v. Gilmore, 533 U.S. 1301 (2001) Zelman v. Simmons-Harris, 536 U.S. 639 (2002) Elk Grove Unified School District v. Newdow, 542 U.S. 1 (2004) Locke v. Davey, 540 U.S. 712 (2004) McCreary County v. ACLU, 2005 WL 1498988 (2005). Van Orden v. Perry, 2005 WL 1500276 (2005). The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Section 9524 “Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools,” U.S. Department of Education (February 7, 2003). Page 11 of 13 First Amendment: Speech Tinker v. Des Moines, 393 U.S. 503 (1968) Board of Education, Island Trees Union Free School District No. 26 v. Pico, 457 U.S. 853 (1982) Bethel School District No. 403 v. Fraser, 478 U.S. 675 (1986) Hazelwood School Ditrict v. Kuhlmeier, 484 U.S. 260 (1987) Boroff v. Van Wert City Board of Education, 220 F.3d 465 (2000) Scott v. School Board of Alachua County, 324 F.3d 1246 (11th Cir. 2003) Fourth Amendment: Privacy New Jersey v. T.L.O., 469 U.S. 325 (1985) Vernonia School District 47J v. Acton, 515 U.S. 646 (1995) Board of Education of Independent School District No. 92 of Pottawatomie County v. Earls, 122 S.Ct. 2559 (2002) th Beard v. Whitmore Lake School District, 402 F.3d 598 (6 Cir. 2005) English Language Learners Lau v. Nichols, 414 U.S. 563 (1974) Guadalupe Organization, Inc. v. Tempe Elementary School District, 587 F.2d 1022 (9th Cir. 1978) Keyes v. Shool Disict No. 1, Denver, Colorado, 576 F.Supp 1503 (D. Colo. 1983) Valeria v. Wilson, 12 F.Supp.2d 1007 (N.D. Ca. 1998) th Valeria v. Davis, 307 F.3d 1036 (9 Cir. 2002) The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title III Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Department of Education, 69 FR 35462 (June 24, 2004). Final Rule Stage, Department of Education, 70 FR 26797-01 (May 16, 2005). Illegal Aliens Plyler v. Doe, 457 U.S. 202 (1982) “Bill Summary and Status of S.1545, the Development, Relief, and Education Act for Alien Minors Act of 2003 (the DREAM Act).” “A Summary of the DREAM Act,” National Immigration Law Center (February 2005). Special Education Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004, Pub. L. 108-446 (codified at 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et al.). http://www.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/idea2004.html (link to bill at the bottom of the page). Board of Education of the Hendrick Hudson Central School District v. Rowley, 458 U.S. 176 (1982) Irving Independent School District v. Tatro, 144 S.Ct. 3371 (1984) Florence County School District 4 v. Carter, 510 U.S. 7 (1993) Cedar Rapids Community School v. Garre, 119 S.Ct. 992 (1999) th Weast v. Shaffer, 377 F.3d 449 (4 Cir. 2004) Department of Education, Title I – Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged, 34 CFR Part 200 (December 9, 2003) Spirit of Brown v. Board Lacking in Special Ed, Researchers Say,” Education Daily (June 3, 2004) “GAO assails ED Response to Special Ed Violations,” Education Daily (May 24, 2004) “Republicans Won’t Commit to Pre-Conference on IDEA,” Education Daily (June 7, 2004) “States Urge Senate Democrats to Drop IDEA Pre-Conference,” Education Daily (June 10, 2004) “IDEA Reauthorization: ‘Frivolous’ Proposal Demands Attorneys Know Letter of the Law,” Education Daily (June 16, 2004) “NCD: Keep Expectations High for Special Ed Students,” Education Daily (June 8, 2004) The NCLB Twenty-Percent Rule, 34 CFR 200.48. Page 12 of 13 “Republicans Won’t Commit to Pre-Conference on IDEA,” Education Daily (June 7, 2004) “States Urge Senate Democrats to Drop IDEA Pre-Conference,” Education Daily (June 10, 2004) “IDEA Reauthorization: ‘Frivolous’ Proposal Demands Attorneys Know Letter of the Law,” Education Daily (June 16, 2004) “NCD: Keep Expectations High for Special Ed Students,” Education Daily (June 8, 2004) The NCLB Twenty-Percent Rule, 34 CFR 200.48. Page 13 of 13