KENNESAW STATE UNIVERSITY
GRADUATE COURSE PROPOSAL OR REVISION,
Cover Sheet (10/02/2002)
Course Number/Program Name ITEC 7500 Capstone Experience and Portfolio
Department Proposed: Instructional Technology and Educational Foundations
Degree Title (if applicable) Instructional Technology
Proposed Effective Date Fall, 2007
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
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 __ITEC 7500____________________
Course Title Capstone Experience and Portfolio_
Credit Hours 3
Prerequisites Admission to M.Ed. program in Instructional Technology
Description (or Proposed Degree Requirements)
This course represents the capstone experience for the Master of Education in
Instructional Technology. The purpose of the portfolio is to document mastery of the
ISTE technology facilitation standards as well as to serve as a systematic, reflection-inaction approach to problem solving and decision-making. This process is designed to
document the candidate’s development of expertise as an Instructional Technology
facilitator. A primary goal of the portfolio is to document the candidate’s ability to
provide technology facilitation at the building level. The portfolio provides a detailed
authentic picture of the candidate’s professional practice and reflective analysis of the
integration of courses taken supported by theory. Changes in classroom practices as well
as philosophy and vision will be included.
III.
Justification
A required element in each portfolio for the Graduate Program is the portfolio narrative.
The purpose of the portfolio narrative is to ensure that every candidate reflects on each of
the proficiencies on the CPI and the TF standards with regard to what evidence the
candidate has selected for his/her portfolio. In your portfolio, you need to include a
narrative which includes descriptive, analytic and reflective writing in which you reflect
on each proficiency and how you make the case that the evidence you have selected in
your portfolio supports a particular proficiency, using the Portfolio Narrative Rubric as a
guide. The narrative should be comprehensive, documenting research-based best
practices.
IV.
Additional Information (for New Courses only)
Instructor:
Text: American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association (5th edition). Washington, DC: Author.
Elbow, P., & Belanoff, P. (2000). Sharing and Responding (3rd ed.). Boston: McGrawHill Higher Education.
Prerequisites:
Admission to M.Ed. program in Instructional Technology
Objectives:
As a result of satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of this course, the candidate will accomplish the
objectives listed in the table below.
Course objective
KSU M.Ed Candidate
Performance
Instrument Link
Outcome 3
NBPTS Link
PSC/NCATE Link
Core proposition 4
Professional and
pedagogical knowledge
and skills.
Writes descriptively,
analytically, and
reflectively.
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4
and 5
Works collaboratively
and provides feedback
to peers.
Completes all required
elements of the M.Ed. in
Instructional
Technology portfolio.
Follows institutional
policies and professional
guidelines of academic
honesty.
Exhibits professional
behavior in interactions
with professors and
colleagues.
Presents professional
portfolio to colleagues
and peers.
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4
and 5
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4
and 5
Dispositions
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4
and 5
Dispositions
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4
and 5
Dispositions
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4
and 5
Dispositions
Successfully links
evidence from practice
to performance
indicators.
Dispositions
Professional and
pedagogical knowledge
and skills.
Dispositions
Dispositions
Instructional Method
The instructional method will blend traditional face-to-face lecture, professional
readings and class discussions with online exercises, discussion forums and
collaborative activities.
V. Evaluation and Grading
S – Satisfactory completion of all course requirements.
U – Failure to complete all course requirements.
I - See most recent graduate catalog for guidelines describing when a grade of
incomplete.
V.
Resources and Funding Required (New Courses only)
Resource
Amount
Faculty
Other Personnel
Equipment
Supplies
Travel
New Books
New Journals
Other (Specify)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
TOTAL
0
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)
If course used to satisfy CPC, what areas?
Learning Support Programs courses which are
required as prerequisites
Instructional Technology
ITEC 7500
Capstone Experience and Portfolio
3 credit class
Fall 2007
Regular
APPROVED:
________________________________________________
Vice President for Academic Affairs or Designee __
VII Attach Syllabus
I.
Course Number:
Course Title:
College:
Semester:
Room:
ITEC 7500
Capstone Experience & Portfolio
Bagwell College of Education
II.
Instructors:
III.
Class Meetings:
IV.
Required Text:
American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association
(5th edition). Washington, DC: Author.
Elbow, P., & Belanoff, P. (2000). Sharing and Responding (3rd ed.). Boston: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
V.
Catalog Course Description: ITEC 7500. Capstone Experience & Portfolio. 3-0-3
This course represents the capstone experience for the Master of Education in Instructional Technology. The purpose of the portfolio is to
document mastery of the ISTE technology facilitation standards as well as to serve as a systematic, reflection-in-action approach to problem
solving and decision-making. This process is designed to document the candidate’s development of expertise as an Instructional Technology
facilitator. A primary goal of the portfolio is to document the candidate’s ability to provide technology facilitation at the building level. The
portfolio provides a detailed authentic picture of the candidate’s professional practice and reflective analysis of the integration of courses taken
supported by theory. Changes in classroom practices as well as philosophy and vision will be included.
VI.
Professional Portfolio Narrative:
A required element in each portfolio for the Graduate Program is the portfolio narrative. The purpose of the portfolio narrative is to ensure that
every candidate reflects on each of the proficiencies on the CPI and the TF standards with regard to what evidence the candidate has selected
for his/her portfolio. In your portfolio, you need to include a narrative which includes descriptive, analytic and reflective writing in which you
reflect on each proficiency and how you make the case that the evidence you have selected in your portfolio supports a particular proficiency,
using the Portfolio Narrative Rubric as a guide. The narrative should be comprehensive, documenting research-based best practices.
VII.
Purpose and Rationale:
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 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.
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-Based Activities
While completing your graduate program at Kennesaw State University, you are required to be involved in a variety of leadership and schoolbased 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.
TF-VIII.E. Engage in supervised field-based experiences with accomplished technology facilitators and/or directors.
1. Examine components needed for effective field-based experiences in instructional program development, professional development,
facility and resource management, WAN/LAN/wireless systems, or managing change related to technology use in school based
settings. (TF-VIII.E.1)
VIII:
Goals and Objectives:
As a result of satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of this course, the candidate will accomplish the objectives listed in the table below.
Course objective
KSU M.Ed Candidate
Performance Instrument Link
Outcome 3
NBPTS Link
PSC/NCATE Link
Core proposition 4
Professional and pedagogical
knowledge and skills.
Writes descriptively,
analytically, and reflectively.
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4 and 5
Works collaboratively and
provides feedback to peers.
Completes all required
elements of the M.Ed. in
Instructional Technology
portfolio.
Follows institutional policies
and professional guidelines of
academic honesty.
Exhibits professional behavior
in interactions with professors
and colleagues.
Presents professional portfolio
to colleagues and peers.
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4 and 5
Dispositions
Professional and pedagogical
knowledge and skills.
Dispositions
Dispositions
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4 and 5
Dispositions
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4 and 5
Dispositions
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4 and 5
Dispositions
Outcome 3
Core propositions 4 and 5
Dispositions
Successfully links evidence
from practice to performance
indicators.
IX.
Requirements/Assignments:
Online Human subjects training- must be completed at the following link http://cme.cancer.gov .
Graduate Diversity Survey- must be completed at the following link http://bcoe.kennesaw.edu/diversity/
Impact on student learning analysis
Portfolio completion
PowerPoint presentation
X:
Evaluation and Grading:
S – Satisfactory completion of all course requirements.
U – Failure to complete all course requirements.
I - See most recent graduate catalog for guidelines describing when a grade of “incomplete” may be assigned.
Policies
XI.
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.
Academic Honesty: 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.
XII.
Course Outline
Weeks in bold print are those during which class will be scheduled in KH 2001 and candidates are required to attend.
Week 1: Introduction/Syllabus/Expectations, Descriptive/Analytic/Reflective writing, artifacts, guidelines for peer
review and editing, etc
Quad I: Philosophy and Subject Matter Experts
Week 2: First draft of revised philosophy. Sorting, choosing artifacts, peer review and editing begins.
Week 3 : Editing/Writing Groups-First drafts of “Subject Matter Expert”, continued revision of philosophy.
Week 4: Editing/Writing Groups- Second drafts of “SME”
Week 5: Third drafts of “SME” editing/writing groups meet in 2001 Lab. Draft (4) of SME and philosophy to
professor.
Quad 2: Facilitators. of Learning
Week 6: Initial feedback from professor on SME and Philosophy. Editing/Writing Groups first draft of
“Facilitator of Learning”
Week of 7: Editing/writing groups. Second drafts of “FOL”
Week of 8: Editing/writing groups. Third drafts of “FOL”
Week of 9: Third drafts of “FOL” editing/writing groups meet in 2001 Lab. Draft (4) of “FOL” to professor.
Quad 3: Collaborative Professionals
Week of 10: Initial feedback from professor on FOL. Editing/Writing Groups first draft of
“Collaborative Professional”
Week of 11: Editing/writing groups. Second drafts of “CP”. 3rd draft of “CP” and reference section to professor.
Week of 12: FIRST COMPLETE DRAFT with all appendices and references to professor.
Week of 13: Feedback from first final draft returned.
Week of 14: SECOND COMPLETE DRAFT with all appendices and references to professor. In lab preparing
Powerpoint presentations and doing final edits.
Week of 15: You must make a time to pick up feedback from professor sometime Monday or Tuesday of this
week. Although this is Thanksgiving week, you must work on final edits!!!!!!!! They take FOREVER!!!
Week of 16: FINAL DRAFT DUE. Binding fees paid, copies delivered to library!!!
Week of 17: Powerpoint presentations
XIII.
References/Bibliography
Brause, R.S. & Mayher, J.S. (Eds.) (1991). Search and research: What the inquiring teacher needs to know. London: Falmer Press.
Campbell, D. M, Cignetti, P. B, Melenyzer, B. J, Netttles, D. H, & Wyman. R. M. (2001). How to Develop a Professional Portfolio, A
Manual for Teachers (2nd ed). Boston: Allyn and Bacon
Elbow, P., & Belanoff, P. (1986). Staffroom interchange: Portfolios as a substitute for proficiency examinations. CCC, 37, 336-339.
Good, T. L. & Brophy, J. E. (1987). Looking in classrooms. (4th ed). New York: Harper & Row.
Hubbard, R.S. & Power, B.M. (1993). The art of classroom inquiry: A handbook for teacher-researchers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Kincheloe, J. (1991). Teachers as researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. London: Falmer Press.
LaBoskey, V.K. (1994). Development of reflective practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
McIntyre, D.& Byrd, D. (Eds.) (2000). Research on Effective Models for Teacher Education. Thousand Oaks, California: Corwin Press.
McMillan, J. H. & Wergin, J. F. (2002). Understanding & evaluating educational research. (2nd ed.) Columbus, OH: Merrill.
Rogers, S. & Danielson, K. (1996). Teacher portfolios. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Russell, T. & Munby, H. (Eds.) (1992). Teachers and teaching: From classroom to reflection. London: Falmer Press.
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Smyth, J & Shacklock, G. (1998). Re-Making Teaching; Ideology, policy and practice. London: Routledge.
Tabachnick, B.R. & Zeichner, K. (1991). Issues and practices in inquiry oriented-teacher education. London: Falmer Press.
Wilson, J. & Wing Jan, L. (1993). Thinking for themselves: Developing strategies for reflective learning. Armadale, Australia:
Eleanor Curtain Publishing.