BAGWELL COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Ed.S./Ed.D. Program
EDL 8540 21st Century Facilities and Finance
Kennesaw State University
Bagwell College of Education
Department: Educational Leadership
Department phone number:
Semester: XXXX
Credit Hours: 3
INSTRUCTOR:
TEXTS:
e-mail:
Web page:
Office Phone:
Kowalski, T. J. (2002). Planning and managing school facilities. Westport, CT: Bergin & Garvey.
Odden, A. R., & Picus, L. O. (2004). School finance. New York, NY: McGraw Hill
COURSE CATALOG DESCRIPTION:
Prerequisites:
Admission to the Ed.S. or Ed.D. program in Educational Leadership or approval of the
Educational Leadership Department to enroll in this course as an elective course.
This course provides a comprehensive overview of fiscal and facilities management associated
with 21st century public school administration. Topics include reviewing the sources of funding
for public schools and procedures for accounting for those funds. Theories and research related to
facility and program management will also be discussed. Special issues surrounding planning for
and funding technology programs in K-12 schools and managing technology-rich learning
organizations will be highlighted.
PURPOSE/RATIONALE:
Introducing, adopting, and sustaining technology uses in organizations, especially schools, is a
complex endeavor that often fails without the correct types of system support for the innovation.
Among the important types of system support is facilities and fiscal management and operations.
This course will provide educational leaders with a stronger framework for funding, planning,
creating, securing, and managing 21st Century Learning Environments.
KSU 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
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 1
of 14
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, 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 believe that the concept of expertise is central to preparing
effective classroom teachers and teacher leaders. Researchers describe how during the continuum
phases teachers progress from being Novices learning to survive in classrooms toward becoming
Experts who have achieved elegance in their teaching. We, like Sternberg (1998), believe that
expertise is not an end-state but a process of continued development.
Use of Technology:
Technology Standards for Educators are required by the Professional Standards Commission.
Telecommunication and information technologies will be integrated throughout the master
teacher preparation program, and all candidates must be able to use technology to improve
student learning and meet Georgia Technology Standards for Educators. During the courses,
candidates will be provided with opportunities to explore and use instructional media. They will
master use of productivity tools, such as multimedia facilities, local-net and Internet, and feel
confident to design multimedia instructional materials, and create WWW resources.
Field Experience:
While participating in all field experiences, you are encouraged to be involved in a variety of
school-based activities directed at the improvement of teaching and learning. Activities may
include, but are not limited to, attending and presenting at professional conferences, participating
in leadership activities, attending PTA/school board meetings, and participating in educationrelated community events. As you continue your field experiences, you are encouraged to explore
every opportunity to learn by doing.
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
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 2
of 14
methods and materials for every student. Among these attributes are ethnicity, race,
socioeconomic status, gender, giftedness, disability, language, religion, family structure,
sexual orientation, and geographic region. 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 (770-423- 6443) and develop an
individual assistance plan. In some cases, certification of disability is required.
Please be aware that there are other support/mentor groups on the campus of Kennesaw State
University that address each of the multicultural variables outlined above. For more information
contact the Student Life Center at 770-423-6280.
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.
d. are knowledgeable about the factors contributing to safe physical environments for
education.
e. develop, articulate, implement, and steward a vision of learning supported by the
school community
2. Demonstrate leadership as agents for change, collaboration and collegiality. Candidates
a. understand the complexity of schools and the ambiguous nature of educational issues.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 3
of 14
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.
f. support the teaching and learning process by soliciting all sources of funding and
educational resources.
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.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 4
of 14
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
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES: (Aligned to Program Standards)
Candidates will be prepared to plan, finance, and administer 21st Century learning facilities:
In pursuit of these goals, the learning objectives of this course include:
1. Designing and equipping learning facilities to accommodate needs of diverse learners,
including adaptive and assistive technologies (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TL II)
2. Locating and evaluating current research on teaching and learning with technology when
planning learning environments (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TL-II)
3. Identifying technology resources and evaluate them for accuracy and suitability based on
the content standards (ELCC 2, 3; NETS-A IV; TL II)
4. Modeling the integration of data from multiple software applications using advanced
features of applications such as word processing, database, spreadsheet, communication,
and other tools into a product. (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TL V )
5. Organizing, coordinating, and participating in an online learning community related to
the use of technology to support learning (ELCC 6; NETS-A IV; TLV)
6. Developing policies related to the acquisition of appropriate adaptive/assistive hardware
and software for students and teachers with special needs. (ELCC 2,3; NETS-A IV;
TLVI)
7. Communicating research and establish policies to promote/enforce privacy, security,
wellness, and safety related to technology use (ELCC 2, 3; NETS-A IV, VI; TL VI)
8. Using research findings in establishing a policy and implementation strategies to promote
equitable access to technology resources for students and teachers (ELCC 2, 3; NETS-A
IV; TL VI)
9. Promote environmentally safe and healthy practices related to technology (ELCC 3;
NETS-A VI)
10. Ensure equity of access to technology resources that enable and empower all learners and
educators (ELCC 3, 5, 6; NETS-A VI)
11. Developing plans to configure software/computer/technology systems and related
peripherals in laboratory, classroom cluster, and other appropriate instructional
arrangements (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
12. Installing local mass storage devices and media to store and retrieve information and
resources (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
13. Prioritizing issues related to selecting, installing, and maintaining wide area Networks
(WANs) for school districts and facilitate integration of technology infrastructure with
the WAN (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
14. Managing software used in classroom and administrative settings (ELCC2, 3; NETS-A
IV; TLVII)
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 5
of 14
15. Evaluating methods of installation, maintenance, inventory, and management of software
libraries (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TLVII)
16. Developing and disseminating strategies for troubleshooting and maintaining various
hardware/software configurations found in school settings (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TLVII)
17. Selecting Network software packages used to operate a computer Network system or a
Local Area Network (LAN) (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV; TL-VII)
18. Analyzing need for technology support personnel to manage district technology resources
and maximize use by administrators, teachers and students to improve learning (ELCC 3;
NETS-A IV; TL VII)
19. Investigating purchasing strategies and procedures for acquiring administrative and
instructional software for educational settings (ELCC 2, 3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
20. Developing and utilizing guidelines for budget planning and management procedures
related to educational computing and technology facilities and resources (ELCC3; NETSA IV; TL VII)
21. Developing and disseminating a system for analyzing and implementing procedures
related to troubleshooting and preventive maintenance on technology infrastructure
(ELCC3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
22. Maintaining and disseminating current information involving facilities planning issues
and computer related technologies (ELCC3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
23. Designing and developing policies and procedures concerning staging, scheduling, and
security for managing hardware, software, and related technologies in a variety of
instructional and administrative school settings (ELCC3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
24. Differentiating among specifications for purchasing technology systems in school
settings.
25. Communicating and applying principles and practices of educational research in
educational technology (ELCC3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
26. Describing social and historical foundations of education and how they relate to the use
of technology in schools (ELCC3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
27. Discussing issues relating to building collaborations, alliances, and partnerships
involving educational technology initiatives (ELCC3; NETS-A IV; TL VII)
28. Designing and lead in the implementation of an effective group process related to
technology leadership or planning (ELCC3; NETS-A IV; TL-VIII)
29. Using evaluation findings to recommend modifications in technology implementations
(ELCC3; NETS-A IV; TL-VIII)
30. Comparing and evaluating district-level technology plans (ELCC3; NETS-A IV; TLVIII)
31. Developing, implementing, and monitoring policies and guidelines to ensure
compatibility of computers (ELCC 3; NETS-A IV)
32. Designing and supporting technology replacement cycles (ELCC3, NETS-A IV)
33. Using strategic planning principles to lead and assist in the acquisition, implementation,
and maintenance of technology resources (ELCC 3, NETS-A IV; TL VII)
34. Plan, develop, and implement strategies and procedures for resource acquisition and
management of technology-based systems including hardware and software (ELCC 3,
NETS-A IV; TL VII)
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 6
of 14
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES – aligned to Program Standards
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
1. Designing and equipping learning
facilities to accommodate needs of
diverse learners, including adaptive and
assistive technologies
2. Locating and evaluating current
research on teaching and learning with
technology when planning learning
environments
4e, 6a, 6c,
6d
1a
3. Identifying technology resources and
4b
evaluate them for accuracy and
suitability based on the content standards
4. Modeling the integration of data from
multiple software applications using
advanced features of applications such
as word processing, database,
spreadsheet, communication, and other
tools into a product.
5. Organizing, coordinating, and
participating in an online learning
community related to the use of
technology to support learning.
6. Developing policies related to the
acquisition of appropriate
adaptive/assistive hardware and software
for students and teachers with special
needs.
7. Communicating research and establish
policies to promote/enforce privacy,
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
3c
2a, 2b, 2c,
2d, 2e
Distributed
School
Leadership
Roles*
Operations
Leader
PSC/NCATE
Standard
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.5
Learning &
Development
Leader
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
Data Analysis
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1.2, 1.5
1b
Process
Improvement
Leader
1.5
1a, 1b
Operations
Leader
1.5
Page 7
of 14
security, wellness, and safety related to
technology use
8. Using research findings in
establishing a policy and implementation
strategies to promote equitable access to
technology resources for students and
teachers
9. Promote environmentally safe and
healthy practices related to technology
10. Ensure equity of access to
technology resources that enable and
empower all learners and educators
11. Developing plans to configure
software/computer/technology systems
and related peripherals in laboratory,
classroom cluster, and other appropriate
instructional arrangements
12. Installing local mass storage devices
and media to store and retrieve
information and resources
13. Prioritizing issues related to
selecting, installing, and maintaining
wide area Networks (WANs) for school
districts and facilitate integration of
technology infrastructure with the WAN
14. Managing software used in
classroom and administrative settings
15. Evaluating methods of installation,
maintenance, inventory, and
management of software libraries
16. Developing and disseminating
strategies for troubleshooting and
maintaining various hardware/software
configurations found in school settings
17. Selecting Network software
packages used to operate a computer
Network system or a Local Area
Network
18. Analyzing need for technology
support personnel to manage district
technology resources and maximize use
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
1a, 5b
Operations
Leader
1.5
1b
Operations
Leader
Operations
Leader
1.5
1b, 5b
Operations
Leader
1.5
4e
Operations
Leader
1.5
4e
Operations
Leader
1.5
4e
Curriculum,
Instruction &
Assessment
Leader
1.2, 1.5, 1.8
1b
4b
Operations
Leader
Operations
Leader
1.5
1.5
1a, 4a
Operations
Leader
1.5
4e
Operations
Leader
1.5
4e
Operations
Leader
1.5
Page 8
of 14
by administrators, teachers and students
to improve learning
19. Investigating purchasing strategies
and procedures for acquiring
administrative and instructional software
for educational settings
20. Developing and utilizing guidelines
for budget planning and management
procedures related to educational
computing and technology facilities and
resources
21. Developing and disseminating a
system for analyzing and implementing
procedures related to troubleshooting
and preventive maintenance on
technology infrastructure
22. Maintaining and disseminating
current information involving facilities
planning issues and computer related
technologies
23. Designing and developing policies
and procedures concerning staging,
scheduling, and security for managing
hardware, software, and related
technologies in a variety of instructional
and administrative school settings
24. Differentiating among specifications
for purchasing technology systems in
school settings.
1b
Operations
Leader
1.5
1b
Operations
Leader
1.5
1a, 4a
Operations
Leader
1.5
1a
Operations
Leader
1.5
1a
Operations
Leader
1.5
4e
Operations
Leader
1.5
25. Communicating and applying
principles and practices of educational
research in educational technology
26. Describing social and historical
foundations of education and how they
relate to the use of technology in schools
27. Discussing issues relating to building
collaborations, alliances, and
partnerships involving educational
technology initiatives
5a
Learning &
Development
Leader
Learning &
Development
Leader
Relationship
Development
Leader
1.2, 1.5
28. Designing and lead in the
implementation of an effective group
process related to technology leadership
or planning
29. Using evaluation findings to
recommend modifications in technology
2a, 2b, 2c,
2d, 2e
Relationship
Development
Leader
1.6
4b
Process
Improvement
1.5
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
1c
2a, 2b, 2c,
2d, 2e
1.2, 1.5
1.6
Page 9
of 14
implementations
30. Comparing and evaluating districtlevel technology plans
1c
31. Developing, implementing, and
1b
monitoring policies and guidelines to
ensure compatibility of computers
32. Designing and supporting
1b
technology replacement cycles
33. Using strategic planning principles to 1b
lead and assist in the acquisition,
implementation, and maintenance of
technology resources
34. Plan, develop, and implement
strategies and procedures for resource
acquisition and management of
technology-based systems including
hardware and software
1b
Leader
Performance
Improvement
Leader
Operations
Leader
Operations
Leader
1.5
1.5
Operations
Leader
Process
Improvement
Leader
Operations
Leader
Process
Improvement
Leader
1.5
1.5
1.5
Operations
Leader
*Georgia’s Leadership Institute for School Improvement & Georgia Committee on Educational
Leadership Preparation’s Distributed School Leadership Roles
COURSE OUTLINE:
This course provides a comprehensive overview of fiscal and facilities management associated
with administering technology-rich educational programs. Topics include strategic planning for
instructional technology implementations, reviewing funding sources available for technology;
reviewing procurement and accounting procedures associated with large purchases; considering
the pros and cons of lease versus purchase; providing adequate technology support; and planning
and managing infrastructure projects. reviewing theories and research related to facility and
program management;
Special issues surrounding planning for and funding technology programs in K-12 schools and
managing technology-rich learning organizations will be highlighted.
1.
Funding sources for technologies
a. Allocations
b. Competitive grants
c. Donations
d. Partnerships
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 10
of 14
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
e. SPLOST
f. Other revenue generating plans
Review of Technology Plans
Collaborative Planning for Technology
a. Designing Learning Environments
i. Learning tasks
ii. Configuration
iii. Applications
iv. Assistive/Adaptive Tech
b. Evaluating Technical Options
i. Hardware
ii. Software
iii. Infrastructure/Security
iv. Policy/Procedures
v. Technology Support/Total Cost of Ownership
vi. Interoperability
vii. Redeployment
viii. Lease/Purchase
Technology Management Tools and Processes
Purchasing/Procurement
Accounting practices
COURSE REQUIREMENTS/ASSIGNMENTS:
1. Candidates will participate in a series of online discussion forums and in-class activities
responding to assigned readings, recommended websites, and critical issues related to the
professional learning and instructional technology. Candidate responses should relate not
only to the question(s), but also to the comments made by classmates and/or instructor.
These responses should clearly demonstrate that candidates have read the required
articles, thoroughly examined recommended websites, and participated fully in course
assignments and exercises. Responses should be relevant to the topic and should serve to
move the discussion forward—not simply agree or disagree with what has already been
stated. Candidates should interact with classmates constructively and respectively,
allowing for everyone to participate. Candidates should follow the rules of netiquette to
be provided in class.
2. Candidates will research and compare two wide area network (WAN) and two local area
network (LAN) solutions commonly used in instructional settings. Students will compare
the strengths and weaknesses of the two solutions (including price and performance) for a
specific instructional context. The comparison will be presented in chart format and will
include at least two industry references on each of the selected technologies.
3. Based on the vision of learning developed in Strategic Planning for Educational
Technology, small groups of candidates will:
a. Identify an actual school, set of schools or school district.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 11
of 14
b. Propose a practical, yet robust learning environment that would best support the
realization of the vision in that setting. The learning environment must consider
hardware, software, Internet access, and LAN/WAN solution.
c. Support the proposal with a 3-5 page rationale for the decisions made
d. Develop a plan for establishing that environment and maintaining for a span of
five years.
e. Develop a budget for that plan
EVALUATION AND GRADING:
Online and In-class Discussion of Readings (40% of grade)
LAN/WAN Comparison (15% of grade)
Facility Design Project (45% of grade)
A:
B:
C:
F:
92% - 100%
84%-91%
75%-83%
74% 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.
Action research work submitted should follow APA format. Manuscripts must be proof read to ensure
accuracy in spelling, punctuation, and grammar. Written work should be attractive and neat -ESPECIALLY WITH MATERIALS INTENDED FOR STUDENT USE.
ACADEMIC HONESTY STATEMENT:
The KSU Graduate Catalog 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 reflect 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.”
PROFESSIONALISM: CLASS ATTENDANCE/PARTICIPATION POLICY:
Attendance is required for each class session, and candidates are expected to be on time. Part of
your success in this class is related to your ability to provide peer reviews and feedback to your
group members regarding group projects. Furthermore, responding effectively and appropriately
to feedback from your peers and the professor is another measure of one’s professionalism. Since
each class meeting represents one week of instruction/learning, failure to attend class will impact
your performance on assignments and final exams. Class discussions, group work, and activities
require that everyone be present. There is no way to “make up” this class. Please be prepared
with all readings completed prior to class. You are expected to ask insightful and pertinent
questions.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 12
of 14
REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY:
Facilities:
Bowers, H. & Burkett, C. W. (1987). Relationship of student achievement and characteristics in two selected
school facility environmental settings. Paper presented at the 84th Council of Educational Facility
Planning, International Conference in Edmonton, Alberta.
Castaldi, B. (1987). Educational facilities: Planning, modernization, and management. (3rd Ed.) Boston, MA:
Allyn and Bacon.
Chan, T. C. (1996). Environmental impact on student learning. Valdosta, GA: Valdosta State University.
(ERIC Documentary Service No.: EA 028 032)
Chan, T. C. (1997). An evaluation of the participatory planning approach to school facility planning. Paper
presented to the Annual Conference of the International Society for Educational Planning at
Philadelphia, PA, October, 1997.
Council of Educational Facility Planners. (1994). Guide for planning educational facilities. (Revised Edition.)
Columbus, OH: The Council.
Council of Educational Facility Planners. (1978). Surplus school space: The problems and the possibilities
Columbus, OH: The Council.
Earthman, G. L. (1992). Planning educational facilities for the next century. Reston, VA: Association of
School Business Officials, International.
Herman, J. J. (1995). Effective school facilities. Lancaster, PA.: Technomic.
Research Corporation of the Association of School Business Officials. (1981). School facilities maintenance
And operations. Park Ridge, IL: The Association.
Research Corporation of the Association of School Business Officials (1980). Schoolhouse planning. Park
Ridge, IL: The Association.
Finance:
Augenblick, J. (1977). Systems of state support for school district capital expenditures. Denver,
CO: Education Commission of the States.
Benson, C. (1975). Equity in school financing: Full state funding. Bloomington, IA: Phi Delta
Kappa Educational Foundation.
Chan, T. C. (1983). The pros and cons of contractor financed approach to school construction.
CEFP Journal, 21(6)13.
Education Commission of the States. (1978). School district expenditure and tax controls.
Denver, CO: Education Commission of the States.
Flanigan, J. L. , Richardson, M. D., & Stollar, D. H. (1995). Managing school indebtedness: A
complete guide to school bonding. Lancaster, PA: Technomic Publishing Co.
Garner, C. W. (2004). Education finance for school leaders. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Education.
Guthrie, J. (1975). Equity in school financing: District power equalizing. Bloomington, IA: Phi
Delta Kappa Educational Foundation.
Lindelow, J. (1981). Educational vouchers. Reston, VA: National Association of Secondary
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 13
of 14
School Principals.
Thompson, D. C., & Wood, R. C. (2001). Money and school. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.
Thompson, D.C., Wood, R.C. & Honeyman, D.S. (1994). Fiscal leadership for schools:
Concepts and practices. White Plains, NY: Longman.
Whitney, T.N. (1993). Voters and school finance: The impact of public opinion.
Washington, D.C.: National Conference of State Legislatures.
Wood, R. C. (Editor) (1986). Principles of school business management. Reston, VA:
Association of School Business Officials.
Technology:
Brecher, C., Sercy, C., Silver, D., & Weitzman (2005). Following the money: Using expenditure
analysis as an evaluation tool. American Evaluation Association. 26(2).
Burns, M. (2002). From compliance to commitment: Technology as a catalyst for communities
of learning. Phi Delta Kappn. 84(4).
Cuban, L. (2001). Oversold and underused: computers in the classrooms. Cambridge: Harvard
University Press.
Cuban, L., Kirpatrick, H. & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high
school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American Educational Research
Journal.38(4).
Duffy, F. M., Rogerson, L. & Blick, c. (2000) Redesigning America’s schools: A systems
approach to improvement. Norwood, MA: Christopher-Gordon Publishers.
Durant, R., Chun, Y., Kim, B., & Lee, S. (2004). Toward a new governance paradign for
environmental and natural resources management in the 21st century? Admisntration
Society. 35 (6).
Hall, T. & O’Toole L. (2004) Shaping formal networks through the regulatory process.
Administration Society. 36(2).
Hall, T. E.,& O’Toole, L. J., Jr. (2000). Structures for policy implementation: An analysis of
national legislation, 1965-1966 and 1993-1994. Administration & Society. 31(6).
McMillan, J. H., Henry, G. T., Crosby, D., & Dickey, K. C. (1995). Measuring socio-economic
status at the school level. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 15-21.
Mark, M. M., Henry, G. T., & Julnes, G. (1998). A realist theory of evaluation practice. In G. T.
Henry, G. Julnes, & M. M. Mark (Eds.), Realist evaluation: An emerging theory in support of
practice (pp. 3-31). New Directions for Evaluation, San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Mark, M., Henry, G. T., & Julnes, G. (2000). Evaluation: An integrated framework for
understanding, guiding, and improving policies and programs. San Francisco, CA: JosseyBass.
“The Collaborative Development of Expertise”
Page 14
of 14