KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet (10/02/2002)
Course Number/Program Name ECE 8330 Ethics and Excellence in the Elementary Classroom
Department Elementary and Early Childhood Education
Degree Title (if applicable) 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 12
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 8330 _____________________
Course Title __Ethics and Excellence in the Elementary Classroom
Credit Hours 3
Prerequisites Acceptance to the doctoral program
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements)
This course will address the difficult decisions teachers must face each day in the
classroom where the demands for higher academic performance conflict with their own
ethical standards of the purpose of teaching. While the resolutions to these conflicts are
not uniform, each student will travel their own road toward compromise between ethics
and excellence.
III.
Justification
This course examines the cries for academic excellence that abound in our public schools
and the ethical and pedagogical decisions that must be made by teachers each day to
reach those demands. Scores must be raised. Students must pass special tests to
continue to another grade. Parents are frantic while their children feel like pawns in a
game of chess being moved from place to place and teachers continue to apply pressure
to assure learning takes place. When excellence is demanded, what happens to ethics—
the heart of teaching that considers the student first? When and where can compromises
be made? What happens to the student when ethics are ignored for excellence or
excellence is ignored for ethics? This course will encourage teachers to look at the
whole child, to make the hard decisions so true excellence can co-exist with ethics of the
mind and heart.
Page 2 of 12
IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor:
Text:


Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Damon, W. (2001). Good work: When
ethics and excellence meet. New York: Basic Books.
Prerequisites:
Admission to the Ed.S. program
Objectives:
The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares learning facilitators who understand
their disciplines and principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply
these understandings to making instructional decisions that foster the success of all
learners. As a result of the satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of these courses,
the candidate will demonstrate the following outcomes:
Course objective
Doctoral
KSDs
differentiate between excellent (good) and
compromised work
1b, 4b, 4c
identify barriers that can result in student’s compromised
work
2a, 2e, 4e
examine the role of ethics in the classroom
6d, 1c
.
identify types of ethical dilemmas and barriers to
excellent (good) work in the field of education
explain how expectations focused on academic excellence
(good) may cause conflict with ethical decisions
2a, 5d
3a, 5b, 5e
Distributed School
Leadership Roles*
Learning &
Development Leader,
Change Leader, Data
Analysis Leader,
Curriculum, Instruction
& Assessment Leader,
Process Improvement
leader
Curriculum, Instruction
& Assessment Leader,
Change Leader,
Learning &
Development Leader,
Process Improvement
Leader, Operations
Leader
PSC/NCATE
Standard
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
1.7, `.8
Change Leader,
Relationship
Development Leader
Change Leader,
Relationship
Development Leader,
Process Improvement
Curriculum, Instruction
& Assessment Leader,
Learning &
Development Leader
1.6, 1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.7,
1.8
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.6, 1.7
Page 3 of 12
examine the differences in ethics by social class
6a, 6b
Relationship
Development Leader
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
Instructional Method
Lecture
Class Discussions
Group and Individual Work
Use of Technology
Peer Evaluation
Method of Evaluation
Individual Assignment
A written analysis of a video taped lesson that describes when ethical decisions that
were made --100 points (CPI )
A written analysis of a video taped lesson that describes factors that resulted in
compromised work with discussion as to how to remove those barriers--100
points
A written analysis of a video taped after-school activity that describes when ethical
decisions were made as children interacted; discuss compromised play
opportunities with good play opportunities--100 points (CPI)
Group Assignment
Contribute quality content to large/small group discussions 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
Page 4 of 12
Normal Departmental Growth
Page 5 of 12
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)
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
Learning Support Programs courses which are
required as prerequisites
EECE
ECE 8330
Classroom Ethics
3
Fall 2006
Regular
APPROVED:
________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __
VII Attach Syllabus
Page 6 of 12
Elementary and Early Childhood Education
Education Specialists. Program
ECE 8330 Ethics and Excellence in the Elementary Classroom
Semester Fall, 2006
Kennesaw State University
Bagwell College of Education
Department of Elementary and Early Childhood Education
I.
II.
Course: ECE 8330 Ethics and Excellence in the Classroom
INSTRUCTOR: xxxxx
Kennesaw Hall Room xxx
Office Phone- xxxxx
e-mail xxxxx
III.
CLASS MEETINGS: TBA
IV:
TEXTS
Gardner, H. (1993). Creating minds. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H., Csikszentmihalyi, M., & Damon, W. (2001). Good work: When ethics and excellence meet.
New York: Basic Books.
V. CATALOG COURSE DESCRIPTIONS:
ECE 8xxx Ethics and Excellence in the Elementary Classroom
This course will address the difficult decisions teachers must face each day in the classroom where the
demands for higher academic performance conflict with their own ethical standards of the purpose of
teaching. While the resolutions to these conflicts are not uniform, each student will travel their own
road toward compromise between ethics and excellence.
VI.
PURPOSE/RATIONALE:
This course examines the cries for academic excellence that abound in our public schools and the
ethical and pedagogical decisions that must be made by teachers each day to reach those
demands. Scores must be raised. Students must pass special tests to continue to another grade.
Parents are frantic while their children feel like pawns in a game of chess being moved from place
to place and teachers continue to apply pressure to assure learning takes place. When excellence
is demanded, what happens to ethics—the heart of teaching that considers the student first?
When and where can compromises be made? What happens to the student when ethics are
ignored for excellence or excellence is ignored for ethics? This course will encourage teachers to
look at the whole child, to make the hard decisions so true excellence can co-exist with ethics of
the mind and heart.
Page 7 of 12
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 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 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 endstate 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.
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares learning facilitators who
understand their disciplines and principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply these
understandings to making instructional decisions that foster the success of all learners. As a result of the
satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of these courses, the candidate will demonstrate the following
outcomes:
ECE 8xxx Ethics in the Elementary Classroom.
Course objective
Doctoral
KSDs
differentiate between excellent (good) and
compromised work
1b, 4b, 4c
Distributed School
Leadership Roles*
Learning &
Development Leader,
PSC/NCATE
Standard
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.6,
Page 8 of 12
identify barriers that can result in student’s compromised
work
2a, 2e, 4e
examine the role of ethics in the classroom
6d, 1c
.
identify types of ethical dilemmas and barriers to
excellent (good) work in the field of education
explain how expectations focused on academic excellence
(good) may cause conflict with ethical decisions
examine the differences in ethics by social class
2a, 5d
3a, 5b, 5e
6a, 6b
Change Leader, Data
Analysis Leader,
Curriculum, Instruction
& Assessment Leader,
Process Improvement
leader
Curriculum, Instruction
& Assessment Leader,
Change Leader,
Learning &
Development Leader,
Process Improvement
Leader, Operations
Leader
1.7, `.8
Change Leader,
Relationship
Development Leader
Change Leader,
Relationship
Development Leader,
Process Improvement
Curriculum, Instruction
& Assessment Leader,
Learning &
Development Leader
Relationship
Development Leader
1.6, 1.7, 1.8
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.5, 1.7,
1.8
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
1.1, 1.2, 1.3,
1.4, 1.6, 1.7
1.4, 1.5, 1.6
COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND ASSIGNMENTS:
VIII.
Individual Assignment
A written analysis of a video taped lesson that describes when ethical decisions that were made -100 points (CPI )
A written analysis of a video taped lesson that describes factors that resulted in compromised work
with discussion as to how to remove those barriers--100 points
A written analysis of a video taped after-school activity that describes when ethical decisions were
made as children interacted; discuss compromised play opportunities with good play
opportunities--100 points (CPI)
Group Assignment
Contribute quality content to large/small group discussions S/U
Three points will be subtracted from the final average for each “U” received.
EVALUATION AND GRADING:
A:
B:
C:
F:
92% - 100%
84% - 91%
75% - 83%
75% or lower
Note: All written work should reflect careful organization of material and the high standards of investigation
associated with college-level studies. Papers should be typewritten, on 8 1/2 x 11 in. paper. All work submitted
should follow APA format. Manuscripts must be proof-read to ensure accuracy in spelling, punctuation, and
Page 9 of 12
grammar. Written work should be attractive and neat -- ESPECIALLY WITH MATERIALS INTENDED FOR
STUDENT USE.
IX. 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.
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
Books
Colby, A. & Damon, W. (1994). Some do care. New York: Free Press.
Page 10 of 12
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity. New York: HarperCollins.
Fischman, W., Solomon, B., Greenspan, D., & Gardner, H. (2004). Making good.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Michaelson, M. & Nakamura, J. (2001). Supportive frameworks for youth engagement.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Articles & Chapters
Bailyn, L. (1993). Breaking the mold: Women, men, and time in the new corporate world.
New York: The Free Press.
Barber, B. (1963). Some problems in the sociology of the professions. Daedalus, 92, 669-688.
Boss, J.A. (1994). The autonomy of moral intelligence. Educational Theory, 44 (4), 399-416.
Buchman, M. (1986). Role over person: Morality and authenticity in teaching. Teachers College Record, 87, 529-543.
Damon, W. (2003). The development of purpose during adolescence. Applied Developmental Science, 7 (3), 119128.
Eraut, M. (1994). Developing professional knowledge and competence. Philadelphia, PA: Falmer. Chapter 7:
Theories of professional expertise
Fischman, W. and DiBara, J. (2005) Good work in pre-collegiate education: An initial map of the terrain. Good Work
Project.
Freidson, E. (2001). Professionalism: The third logic. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press.
Chapter 8: The assault on professionalism
Chapter 9: The soul of professionalism
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st century. New York: Basic Books. Chapter
5: Is there a moral intelligence?
Gardner, H. (2003). Three distinct meanings of intelligence. In R.J. Sternberg & J. Lautrey (Eds.), Models of
intelligence: International perspectives (pp. 43-54). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
Gardner, H., & Shulman, L. (2005). The professions in America today: Crucial but fragile. Daedalus.
Hughes, E. (1963). Professions. Daedalus, 92, 655-668.
Johnson, S.M. (1986). “Incentives for Teachers: What motivates, what matters.” Educational Administration
Quarterly, 22(Summer): 54-79.
Lamont, M. (2000). The dignity of working men. (Introduction) Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Menges, R.J. (1999) Dilemmas of newly hired faculty. In Menges, R.J & Associates (Eds.) Faculty in new jobs: A
guide to settling in, becoming established, and building institutional support (pp. 19-38). San Francisco, CA:
Jossey-Bass Publications.
Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2005). Engagement in a profession: The case of undergraduate teaching.
Daedalus.
Rosovksky, H. (1990) “University governance: Seven principles to ensure reliable performance.” Chapter 15 in The
University: An Owner’s Manual
Sikes, P. (1992). Imposed change and the experienced teachers. In M. Fullan, & A. Hargreaves, (Eds.), Teacher
development and educational change. London: Falmer.
Turiel, E. (1998). The development of morality. In W. Damon (Ed.), The handbook of child psychology, Vol. 3. New
York: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.
Page 11 of 12
Wallace, D.B., & Gruber, H.E. (1989). Creative people at work. New York: Oxford University Press. Chapter 1: The
evolving systems approach to creative work
Wilson, J.Q. (1995) The moral sense. New York: The Free Press.
Wolfe, A. (2001). Moral freedom. New York: W.W. Norton & Company. Chapter VII: The strange idea of moral
freedom.
Wrzesniewski, A., McCauley, C., Rozin, P., & Schwartz, B. (1997). Jobs, careers, and callings: People’s relations to
their work. Journal of Research in Personality, 31, 21-33.
Youniss, J. & Yates, M. (1997) What we know about engendering civic identity. American Behavioral Scientist, 40 No. 5.
pp. 620-631
Articles & Chapters (most available electronically)
Ericsson, K.A. & Charness, N. (1994). Expert performance: Its structure and acquisition. American Psychologist, 49
(8), 725-747.
Evans, P. (1999) When I grow up, I don’t think I want to be a teacher.” Education Week. June 2nd.
Furman, A (2004 November 5) Measure professors’ real service, not lip service. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
P. B20.
Lagemann, E.C. (2003). Toward a strong profession. Education Week, 23 (24), 48, 36-37.
Nieto, Sonia. (May 2003) What keeps teachers going? Educational Leadership
Seider, S. (2005) Framework experiences: A key to the development of social responsibility in young adults.
www.goodworkproject.org
Shweder, R. (2004) George Bush and the missionary position. Daedalus. 133 (3) pp. 26-36.
Simonton, D.K. (2001). Talent development as a multidimensional, multiplicative, and dynamic process. Current
Directions in Psychological Science, 10 (2), 39-43.
Stein, D. (2004) Wearing two hats: The case of visiting artists in the classroom. www.goodworkproject.org
Ting, T. (2002) An exploration of good work in contemporary visual art. www.goodworkproject.org
Williams, Jackie S. (2003). Why great teachers stay. Educational Leadership, 60, 8, pp 71-74.
Selected readings from the GoodWork Project website (www.goodworkproject.org/papers).
Page 12 of 12