09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
1
EdS Program
I.
COURSE: EDL 8820 Managing the Physical and Fiscal Environment
Credit: 3 Credit Hours
II.
INSTRUCTOR:
Office:
Phone:
III.
IV.
E-Mail:
Office Hours:
CLASS MEETINGS
Dates: TBA
Day/Times: TBA
Bldg/Room: TBA
TEXTS & READINGS:
Required Text:
Guthrie, J. W., Springer, M. G., Rolle, R. A., & Houck, E. A. (2007). Modern education finance
and policy. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
or
Odden, A. & Picus, L. (2000). School finance: A policy perspective (2nd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
And
Thompson, D. C., & Wood, R. C. (2005). Money and schools (3rd ed.). Larchmont, NJ: Eye on
Education.
Supplemental Readings:
Readings as assigned
The literature about school finance focuses primarily on patterns of spending, inequalities, and
opinions about federal and state level funding. Very few address the issues of how principals and
other school leaders should think about budgeting. An effort to address the latter concern is
ongoing throughout the course and should be expected as an addition of new information
throughout your study of school finance.
1
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
2
Sources recommended for literature research:
Journal of Educational Finance
Educational Evaluation and Policy analysis
Economics of Education Review
JSTOR-www.jstor.org
V.
COURSE CATALOG DESCRIPTION
During this module the candidate will, along with the university faculty supervisor,
school/district mentor, and leadership coach, create a program of observation, research, and
involvement designed to gain an understanding into the role of managing resources for
instructional improvement and a safe school environment for learning.
VI.
JUSTIFICATION
The residency module is framed within Distributed School Leadership Practice (DSLP), one of the
leading authors of which is James Spillane of Northwestern University in Chicago, Illinois. Early in
2006, Spillane rejected the commonly held notion that leadership was either the act of a heroic
individual or of several individuals who shared leadership responsibilities. In his book, Distributed
Leadership, Spillane postulates that “…leadership…is a practice…that is the product of joint
interactions of school leaders, followers and aspects of their situation such as routines and tools” (p.
3).
Because this understanding is essential to improving schools in Georgia (see Georgia Leadership
Institute for School Improvement – GLISI – at www.galeaders.org), this residency module is
required of all members of the EdS/EdD cohort in Educational Leadership. The residency module
is taught by faculty with expertise in school leadership, collaboration, and diversity. Topics are
presented in an integrated manner, such that school transformation is seen as whole school reform
initiative where performance-based practice is the hallmark (Leithwood, Day, Sammons, Harris, &
Hopkins, 2006) and the tenets of Distributed School Leadership Practice (Spillane, 2006),
therefore, are embedded within all activities.
Program design supports team building and connections among school districts (building and
system), universities, and beginning leadership candidates. This design is consistent with the
Bagwell College of Education goal of providing a collaborative framework for developing expertise
in teaching, learning, and leadership within the EdS and EdD program. It is anticipated that
participants will mirror this expectation in their future organizational settings. Residency module
activities are problem-based and assist individuals in developing an internal focus and disposition to
meet the challenges and opportunities within leadership practice in their respective career paths and
organizational settings Educator Preparation Rule 505-3-.58, Educational Leadership Program).
2
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
3
Managing the Physical and Fiscal Environment
This module is an overview of resource management focusing on school finance and budgeting,
emphasizing the responsibilities of principals and others at the building and district level, and
examining the issues of finance and budgeting integrated with instructional issues and
considerations of teaching and learning. The module examines the basic conceptual issues in
school finance including the sources of funding for local schools; the basis of fiscal federalism;
and different conceptions of equity. It also includes the major programs of federal and state
funding and introduces budgets, the budgeting process, and the variances from state to state and
district to district. Through supervised practice at the building or district level, candidates will
examine through extensive literature reviews the issues of when resources are effective at
improving learning, how resources are used at the school and classroom levels, and under what
conditions expenditures are likely to be effective.
VII.
CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK SUMMARY
Collaborative Development of Expertise in Teaching, Learning & Leadership
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.
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 they will develop the confidence to design multimedia instructional
materials, and create WWW resources.
3
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
4
The students will be linked through WebCT Vista and via a listserv that will be utilized in
processing the comprehensive experiences of the doctoral program. The members of each cohort
will be linked in a similar way as they move through the program. The emerging technologies
will be utilized with the parallel expectation that participants demonstrate a high degree of
technological literacy in retrieving and sharing information and resources.
Educational Specialist and Doctorate of Education
The knowledge, skills and dispositions (KSD’s) of the graduates of the Doctorate of Education
program in 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.
VIII. GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND PTEU PERFORMANCE OUTCOMES:
The Professional Teacher Education Unit prepares school leaders who understand their
disciplines and principles of pedagogy, who reflect on their practice, and who apply these
understandings to making decisions that foster the success of all learners. As a result of
the satisfactory fulfillment of the requirements of these courses, participants will
demonstrate outcomes that embody the constructs of DSLP, the ten BOR Performance
Strands, the ELCC standards, the PSC standards for Residency, and the roles
recommended by Georgia’s Leadership Institute for School Improvement (GLISI). As
this course is outcomes-driven, successful individuals must provide evidence of meeting
the following complementary PTEU EdS/EdD Performance Outcomes:
1. Fosters an organizational culture that facilitates development of a shared
vision, school improvement and increased learning for all students.
2. Implements sustainable educational change and process improvement.
3. Creates 21st century learning environments that advance best practices in
curriculum, instruction, and assessment.
4. Engages in applied research that supports data-driven planning and decision
making for the improvement of schools and learning.
5. Builds collaborative relationships, teams and community partnerships that
communicate and reflect distributed leadership for learning.
4
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
5
6. Embraces diversity by demonstrating intercultural literacy and global
understanding.
7. Facilitates professional learning and development that enhance and improve
professional practice and productivity.
8. Exercises professionalism and ethical practice.
**Residency/Performance Based structure meets Standard 7 for ELCC and PSC
http://www.gapsc.com/Rules/Current/EducatorPreparation/index.asp
http://www.npbea.org/ELCC/ELCCStandards%20_5-02.pdf
EDL Course Objectives (KSD)
1. Use problem-solving skills and knowledge of
strategic, long-range, and operational planning
(including applications of technology) in the
effective, legal, and equitable organization and
management of fiscal, and material resource
allocation and alignment that focuses on
teaching and learning.
KS
2. Demonstrate ability to manage, assess, and
apply technology resources for business
procedures and scheduling.
KS
3. Creatively seek new resources to facilitate
learning.
KS
4. Demonstrate effective organization of fiscal,
and material resources, giving priority to student
learning and safety, and demonstrate an
understanding of district budgeting processes
and fiduciary responsibilities.
KS
5. Explain the district system for financing
public schools and its effect on the equitable
distribution of educational opportunities within a
school or district.
KS
6. Demonstrate ability to manage time
effectively and to deploy financial resources in a
way that promotes student achievement.
KSD
EdS/EdD
GLISI Leader
PTEU
Roles
Performance
Outcomes
1, 4, 8
Operations
ELCC/
PSC
Standards
BOR
Strands
3
8
Process
Improvement
7
1, 2
Operations
3
8
1, 2
Operations
3
8
1, 2, 4
Operations
3
8
1, 2, 6
Operations
6
8
1, 2
Operations
3
8
5
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
6
7. Demonstrate ability to involve stakeholders in
aligning physical resources and priorities to
maximize ownership and accountability.
KS
8. Apply understanding of school district finance
structures, models, and socio-economic factors
that impact students and communities to ensure
that adequate financial resources are allocated
equitably for the school or district.
KSD
IX.
2, 5
Operations
3
8
5
3
8
Relationship
1, 2
Operations
COURSE REQUIREMENTS AND ASSIGNMENTS:
The Residency Module Structure:
This is one of six modules together which comprise 18 of the 33 credit hours in the Educational
Leadership strand of the EdS program in Leadership for Learning. Each module requires a
minimum of 120 contact hours for three credit hours of residency developed to comply with the
PSC Educator Preparation Rules 505.3-.58 (PSC and ELCC Standard 7). ELCC standard 7.1.b
requires a six month (or equivalent) full time internship experience. Full time is defined as the
number of contact hours per week required for attendance by a full-time student, receiving
federal financial assistance (generally 9-12 contact hours per week). To meet this requirement
50% of total program requirements will be completed in a school/system performance based
structure. Specifically the Rule states, “Candidates participate in performance based activities
that provide significant opportunities for candidates to synthesize and apply the knowledge and
practice and develop the skills identified in core knowledge standards through substantial,
sustained, standards-based work in real settings, planned and guided cooperatively by the
institution and school district personnel and with assessment the responsibility of the
institutions.” In short, performance-based is defined as “real work, in real time, in the real
school working environment” (GLISI, 2008). With the exception of at least three on-campus
seminars, module activities and requirements will be completed at the school/system sites. In
accordance with the PSC rule, the Candidate’s activities will be developed, monitored, and
assessed by the Beginning Leader Candidate Support Team (BLCST). As a part of the
performance-based leadership program, the BLCST will develop an Individualized Induction
Plan to define which artifacts and performances will be used as evidence to address the PSC
Leadership Standards/Elements 1-6 (PSC Educator Preparation Rules 505.03-.01. and 505.3.58). In further compliance with the PSC rules, the module activities were developed in
collaboration with partner schools and districts to ensure that activities reflect work in “real
settings.”
The Individualized Induction Plan:
Requirements for the plan will be agreed upon by the team, including the Beginning Leader
Candidate, at the beginning of the residency. This plan will guide the residency and should
provide the Beginning Leader Candidate with substantial responsibility that increases over time
and in complexity and involves direct interaction with appropriate staff, students, parents, and
community leaders (GLISI Module for Developing a Performer Path Plan Mapping Exemplary
Performances may be used for guidance).
6
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
7
The Individualized Induction Plan should:
 be based on Leadership Standards/Elements 1-6 and demonstrated in a way that
quality performance can be objectively assessed;
 include a timeline that reflects time and responsibility and that evidences completion
of all performances as required by the end of the residency;
 clearly describe for the Beginning Leader Candidate how performance will be
assessed and at what points in the program assessments will occur;
 include description, evidence, and artifacts sufficient to evaluate the performance;
 address substantive issues that have already been empirically determined as important
or that are determined by the Beginning Leader Candidate based on real world data;
and
 assure that activities occur in multiple settings and require interaction with
appropriate educators, parents, and community organizations such as social service
groups, local businesses, community organizations, and parent groups.
Assessment of the Beginning Leader Candidates should:
 include specific criteria to assure performance on Standards/Elements 1-6 including
both quantitative and qualitative measures;
 include descriptions of formative and summative assessments , and remediation, as
needed;
 reflect on performance-based responsibilities that continue to increase with
complexity and job-embedded performances (where reasonable); and
 assign responsibilities for assuring assessments are completed and feedback given,
as appropriate.
Building level or system level residency (See Goals, Objectives and PTEU Performance
Outcomes)
Residency requirements must be completed at the building or system level depending
upon the position held, and must fully demonstrate mastery of the required Leadership
Standards. Elements from the ELCC/PSC standards address specific context for meeting
the standards. The Beginning Leader Candidate Support Team will determine the extent
to which activities will be adapted to the building level, the system level, or both.
According to PSC Educator Preparation Rules 505.3-.58:
Candidates who are assigned to building level leadership positions will demonstrate
knowledge and skills required for building level educational leaders by demonstrating
performance proficiency of the standards and elements listed in the document, Standards,
Elements, and Indicators for the Preparation of Georgia Educational Leaders.
Candidates who are assigned to system level leadership positions will demonstrate
proficiency in the standards and elements listed in Standards, Elements, and Indicators
for the Preparation of Georgia Educational Leaders for system level leaders.
7
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
8
Candidates may add the other leadership area (building or system) by completing the
program requirements for a position in the other area. Only the standards and elements
that specifically pertain to the area not previously completed (building or system level)
are required for adding the other program.
Supervised Residency
The candidate’s residency will be supervised by a Beginning Leader Candidate Support Team
(BLCST). The BLCST will be comprised of the candidate, the university supervisor, a trained
and qualified coach, a mentor from the building level or system. The team will meet at least three
times during the entire residency period (during the course of the six residency modules), will
create the candidate’s Individual Induction Plan, establish observation experiences, examine the
candidate’s portfolio, evaluate progress and establish areas of need, and determine if the
residency requirements have been satisfactorily met. In addition to the initial BLCST meeting,
the candidate and the coach will participate in at least 4 coaching sessions during the six module
span of the six module residency. In addition to the initial BLCST meeting, the building level or
system level mentor will guide the beginning leader to apply the knowledge and skills specified
in the induction plan by directly observing the candidate’s performance on-site followed by
feedback for a total of 36 contact hours over the duration of the program.
Definition of terms
Coaching – A developmental process that builds a leader’s capabilities to achieve professional
and organizational goals. The coaching is conducted through one-on-one and group interactions,
driven by evidence/data from multiple perspectives, and is based on mutual trust and respect.
(GSAEC Guidelines for Graduate Academic Programs in Executive Coaching.
http://www.gsaec.org/curriculum.html )
Leader (Candidate) – An individual candidate in the program who has the potential to make a
significant contribution to the mission and purpose of the organization.
http://www.gsaec.org/curriculum.html
Coach – An individual who works with the coachee (candidate) to develop and implement
strategies to improve his/her performance as a leader (Whitmore, 2005). The coach is external to
the organization and is separate from the formal evaluation process. (Hall, Otago, & Hollenbeck,
1999 as cited in Sue-Chan, Latham, 2004).
Mentor – An individual who is in a professional relationship with the candidate in the same
organization and is considered an expert in the field of study and provides guidance, knowledge,
opportunities to lead, and advice on an ongoing and regular basis through the program of study.
The mentor serves as a part of the team that oversees the development of the candidate and
evaluates his/her performance.
University supervisor - A Kennesaw State university instructor who is responsible for
coordinating and supervising the candidate’s overall experiences during the module. The
supervisor will work with the Beginning Leadership Candidate’s Support Team in developing a
8
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
9
professional residency plan to suit the candidate’s professional needs. The university supervisor
negotiates final approval of the candidate’s activities and experiences at the school/district level
and provides the final assessment for the program requirements in each individual module.
Portfolio and Capstone Experience.
The candidate will develop a portfolio containing artifacts that address skills, knowledge, and
dispositions in alignment with the six PSC standards described in the PSC Educator Preparation
Rule 505.3-.58. The portfolio will describe how the candidate has met specific criteria set out in
the PSC rule (qualitative and quantitative) and includes descriptions of formative and
summative assessments and reflections on performance-based responsibilities that increase with
complexity and job-embedded performances. The candidate will complete a capstone research
project that will be presented to the Professional Teaching Unit.
Instructional Methodology:
The candidates and university supervisor will use WebCT Vista for communication and course
management. Please check daily for postings, mail, and announcements. Instructional methods
may include, but are not limited to:

Problem-Based Learning

Proficiency Examination

Cooperative Learning

Document-Based Inquiry

Case Study Analysis
In-Field Performance-Based Activities Designated by the University for
All Candidates (45%)
Assignments will be determined in collaboration with the sponsoring school/system. A minimum
of 45% of total assignments will be determined by the university and will include but are not
limited to:
Attendance and Participation: Attendance and participation in all university and school/system
based activities is required for successful completion of module activities.
Seminars: Students will be required to attend a minimum of three (3) seminars. The purpose of
the seminars is to provide a value-added component to the residency. The seminars will be
structured to meet student needs. Possible topics include
 Organizing resources to improve student learning
 Site-based budgeting
 Equity v. adequacy
 Finance reform for Georgia schools
 School resources and student achievement
 Finance reform in the United States
 School facilities and their effect on instruction – “Walk through”
 Alternative local funding: PTA’s and Booster Clubs
9
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS






10
Budgeting process at the local level: Who should participate?
Special education funding
Forecasting revenues and expenditures
Local school budgets and the demand on principals
Grants and how to obtain them
Establishing effective school-business partnerships
Reflective Journal: Using “reflect-in” and “reflect-on” strategies, candidates will maintain a
weekly journal reflecting on their experiences and learning (Schon, 1991)
Theoretical Framework Support:
Assessment:
Course Objectives:
Schön, D. A. (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in
and on educational practice.
Holistic
All objectives
Portfolio: Candidates will develop and maintain a portfolio for the entire EdS program. Each
term, the candidate will submit one artifact from the University assignments and one from the
School/System assignments to the university’s electronic Chalk & Wire portfolio management
system.
Theoretical Framework Support:
Assessment:
Course Objectives:
GLISI Guidelines
Holistic
All objectives
Theoretical Framework Support for All Activities Below:
Refer to the related websites and references included at the end of the syllabus for research
support.
Required Activities:
Legal Theory Project (Building or System Level): Investigate the legal theory behind adequacy
and equity lawsuits, examining how courts have interpreted the education clauses in state
constitutions over the past 35 years. Specifically:
 What broad changes have occurred in school funding as a result of litigation, especially in
Georgia?
 Develop arguments for and against full state funding of education in Georgia
 What current argument(s) related to adequacy and equity in funding education exists as
interpreted by current legal challenges, the US Constitution and the Supreme Court
decisions?
 Is there a relationship between financial resources and student achievement? What are the
measures that Georgia uses to determine accountability for taxes spent on schools and
student performance?
 Does Georgia address the increase in productivity of education and the allocation of
resources? Research the data available on the same topic in your own school district and
recommend a process to involve citizens and educators in a new approach to accomplish this
10
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS


11
goal. Support your argument with data at the district level and the legal cases, laws, theories
and practices in your readings.
Examine your district budget as it relates to the achievement of all AYP indicators in NCLB.
Determine how the district prioritizes funding for the most significantly low indicators and
identify areas not funded at the same level. How have the priorities for funding in the last
five years changed in the district based on AYP indicators and changes in demographics?
Provide evidence through acquisition of appropriate data available through the district office.
Examine the school/district goals for School/district improvement plans and identify the
funding that supports the goals and how the funding was allocated.
Theoretical Framework:
Assessment:
Course Objectives:
GLISI Modules;
Rubric
1, 5, 6, 8
Development of School Finance Project (Building or System Level): Trace the development of
the school finance program in Georgia through the various stages. Indicate areas of aspects of the
program that may still be in some of the earlier stages, such as vouchers. Describe the manner in
which resources for education are distributed. This is a Chalk & Wire Activity.
State Comparison Project: Using the web as the primary research tool, select 3-5 states for an indepth comparison of financing public schools (excluding higher education) over the past 10
years. The study will include:
 School funding formula: Describe the manner in which resources for education are
distributed.
 Describe the funding for special education, Limited English Proficiency, and Poverty.
Identify the rules and regulations for these categories if they are different from regular
education and determine if they are from the same resources or from different sources of
funding.
 Compare the political perspectives on school finance for each state.
 Identify the litigation, both state and federal, that influenced funding for each state.
 Identify any resolved issue(s) in school funding for each state.
 Propose a program of district power equalization that would be desirable for Georgia using
the available information on the web links provided.
Theoretical Framework:
Assessment:
Course Objectives:
GLISI Modules;
Rubric
1, 4, 6, 8
Choice Activity (Select One)
System Organization Plan (Building or System Level): This system organization activity is
intended to be offered to EDS candidates for a semester long involvement in investigating the
essence of district organization. It is essential that candidates select school districts of different
sizes so that they can be exposed to different situations and fully understand different situations
educators are facing. Candidates are encouraged to collect data and complete the entire activity
11
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
12
for possible presentation at professional conferences. School districts are organized by their
major functions and work responsibilities according to their sizes and locations to achieve the
greatest efficiency and effectiveness. This activity calls for a comparison of different sizes of
school districts to examine their organizational pattern. The purpose of this study is to expose
candidates in school district organizational experiences in a comparative sense through direct
contact with school district superintendents. Specifically:





Extensively review current literature on school district organizational pattern and report the
major findings.
Identify five school districts of different enrollment sizes to be involved in this activity. Visit
or contact the school districts through direct contact or through the internet web site for the
district to secure a copy of their organization charts. Review and compare the organizational
similarities and differences.
Schedule to interview at least two of the school superintendents to solicit their opinion of
how school districts are organized and how organizational structure can be improved for
effectiveness.
Develop a set of criteria for the structuring of a school district and document why these
criteria are essential.
If your district has a charter school or schools, investigate the organization of the school and
how it compares to other schools and the district and the relations to the school district as a
whole.
Theoretical Framework:
Assessment:
Course Objectives:
GLISI Modules;
Rubric
1-8
Five Year Facility Plan (Building or System Level): This Five Year Facility Plan activity will
extend through an entire semester and is intended to be an activity performed at the school
district level. The plan is a mandate from Georgia Department of Education. Every school
district is required to develop one in every five years. An update of the plan needs to be done
every year. District personnel involved in this activity includes the Superintendent when
possible, the Assistant Superintendent of School Business, School Facility Director, Purchasing
Director, Finance Director, Community Relations Director and School Maintenance Director.
This plan is a mandate from Georgia Department of Education. The purpose of the activity is for
candidates to become familiar with the Five Year Facility Plan and how it relates to the
improvement of educational facilities in the school district. Furnish full report of the
investigation. Specifically



Discuss with the School Facility Director or Assistant Superintendent of School Business
about your assignment in this EDS program, and request permission to access the district
Five Year Facility Plan.
Review the Five Year Facility Plan and write a detailed report describing the components of
the plan and how each component correlate with others.
Interview the Superintendent if possible, the School Facility Director or Assistant
Superintendent of School Business to understand the purpose, the development process, the
implementation and the yearly update of the plan. Determine how funding for educational
12
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
13
facilities is pursued in your school district in addition to state funds secured through the Five
Year Facility Plan implementation.
Investigate the justifications for new school construction and school renovation projects.
Determine if the current practices of Georgia’s Five Year Facility Plan have a relationship to
developing learning environments that accommodate current educational functions? Who
defines the functions and designs the plans in your district? Is there a disconnect between the
state guidelines and the actual stakeholder involvement in planning for facilities?
How does the Georgia model for educational facilities planning correlate with student
population forecasting?
Investigate in your own district the influence in facility planning by the building architect? Is
the architect influenced by the stakeholders, educational leaders, community members or is it
the opposite in practice?
Investigate the process of funding application for school construction projects: The needs, the
allotment, the bond referendum, the SPLOST, and the lottery funds.
Determine the best time to construct a new school building in terms of educational needs,
state allotment availability, climate for bond referendum and additional resources.






Theoretical Framework:
Assessment:
Course Objectives:
GLISI Modules;
Rubric
1-8
In-Field Performance-Based Requirements Designated by the School/System for Each
Individual Candidate Based on a Diagnosis of Needs (55%)
In compliance with PSC Educator Preparation Rules 505.3-.58 (Standard 7) that the learning of
beginning leaders should be contextually based and guided by real school environments, a
minimum of 55% of activities will be identified in collaboration between the university and the
school/district and will be based on a diagnosis of the candidate’s needs using the GLISI
Competency Models and/or other sources of job-embedded needs.
Other Activities: As determined by School/System in collaboration with the University.
Theoretical Framework Support:
Assessment:
Objectives:
X.
Leader Performance and Supply Performance
Support: Competency Models SREB (2007); GLISI
Modules.
Holistic
As determined through diagnosis by BLCST
EVALUATION AND GRADING:
Evaluation:
University Assignments
School/System Assignments
45%
55%
13
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
14
Grading:
A= 90% -100%
B= 80% - 89%
C= 70% - 79%
F= 69% 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, double-spaced and at 10-12 font. All work submitted that requires documentation
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.
While the college standard for evaluation of papers and tests is listed above, the university
supervisor and school mentor in this course will use alternative assessment strategies. Evaluation
is a difficult process in every course. It is especially difficult to quantify the internal process of
developing dispositions of ethics, character and leadership. This development is unique to each
individual and must be recognized by each individual. Rubrics will be shared with candidates as
a means of establishing an understanding of expectation of graduate study in the BCOE and at
KSU.
The emphasis on the individual student as an evaluator is in keeping with the reality that future
administrators/leaders will be expected to be involved in the evaluation and assessment activities
as part of their own continuing professional development and that of those with whom they work
in organizational setting as they continue their professional careers.
The university supervisor and the school mentor contribute to the evaluation process by taking
into consideration student preparation for class sessions, level of participation in class,
individual and group projects/reports individual conferences, and the capstone product for the
educational specialist seminar.
Every effort will be made by the university supervisor and school mentor to be fair and
equitable in the assignment of grades through multiple processes noted above. In the final
analysis, the assigned grade will be based on the best professional judgment of the professor(s)
and supervisor(s).
14
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
XI.
TENTATIVE COURSE OUTLINE
Date
Activity
Beginning of *Seminar: (Required
Term
for continual
enrollment)
Introduction to
Residency Module
TBA and as
Needed
Meetings, observations,
and conferences
Mid-Term
*Seminar: Reviewing
progress
End of
Term
15
GLISI PerformanceBased Modules
*Seminar: Debriefing
Assignment Due
Readings as
assigned
Progress Reports
on Projects
All Assignments
Due
Participants
All members of the Beginning
Leader Candidate Support
Team (BLCST)
All BLCST or specific
members of BLCST as needed
and required
All BLCST or specific
members of BLCST as needed
and required
All BLCST or specific
members of BLCST as needed
and required
*Seminars are not included in the minimum 120 contact hours of performance-based
activity for the Residency Module.
XII.
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
15
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
16
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. The development of an appreciation of diversity as a
core organizational value and its use as a resource will give direction to the activities of the
doctoral seminar and of the whole doctoral program. Consideration will be given to diversity in
developing the membership of the cohorts in the interest of ensuring that the collaborative cohort
experience contributes to the development of such personal and organizational core values.
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.
Papers should be a synthesis of information reported in your own words and with proper
documentation.
Professionalism- Participation/Attendance/Submission of Assignments/Use of Technology
During Class/Seminars: Part of your success in this course is related to providing peer reviews
and feedback to your colleagues regarding course assignments; participating and interacting in
course activities; collaborating and working equitably with colleagues; and treating colleagues
and the professor with respect both in and out of class. Furthermore, responding effectively and
appropriately to feedback from your peers and the professor/supervisor is another measure of
your professionalism. Please be prepared by bringing all materials and readings to meetings and
seminars. All readings assignments must be completed prior to meetings and seminars. We
depend on one another to ask pertinent and insightful questions.
Professionalism also includes appropriate audience behaviors during lectures and presentations.
When someone is speaking to the group or making a presentation, professionals do not engage in
conversations or other distracting behaviors that detract from the audiences’ attention to the
speaker.
Absences may be considered excused only in the case of personal or a professional emergency
and only if approved by the professor/supervisor in advance or as soon as possible after the
emergency event.
Assignments are due on the assigned date. Late assignments will not be accepted by e-mail or
hard copy without approval and may require documentation of a personal or professional
emergency. Re-submission of assignments for improved grades will not be considered unless
specifically determined to be appropriate by the professor.
16
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
17
Using technology during class/seminar (laptops, cell phones, etc.) to check personal e-mail or
engage in activities not associated with course content is not acceptable and will likely result in a
reduction of course participation points. Engaging in personal conversations while
professor/supervisor or groups are presenting is not acceptable and will likely result in a
reduction of class participation points. A break will be provided for snacks and personal use of
technology.
In sum, a lack of professionalism will likely result in grade reduction.
XIII. REFERENCES AND BIBLIOGRAPHY
Baker, B., Green, P., & Richards, C. (2008). Financing education systems. Upper Saddle River,
NJ: Prentice-Hall.
Brimley, V., Jr. & Garfield, R. R. (2008). Financing education in a climate of change. Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon
Georgia’s Leadership Institute for School Improvement (2008). Tools for planning and
improving leader performance.
Guthrie, J. W., Springer, M. G., Rolle, R. A., & Houck, E. A. (2007). Modern education finance
and policy. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
GSAEC Guidelines for Graduate Academic Programs in Executive Coaching. Retrieved July 17,
2008 , from http://www.gsaec.org/curriculum.html
Hall, D. T., Otazo, K.L., & Hollenbeck, G. P. (1999). Behind closed doors: What really
happens in executive coaching. Organizational Dynamics, 27, 39-53.
National Policy Board for Educational Administration (2002). Standards for advanced programs
in educational leadership.
Rice, J. (2004). Equity and efficiency in school finance reform: Competing or complementary
goods? Peabody Journal of Education, 79(3), 134-151.
Schön, D. A. (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational practice, New
York: Teachers Press, Columbia University.
17
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
18
Spillane, J., Diamond., J., & Jita, J. (2003). Leading instruction: The distribution of leadership
for instruction. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 35(5), 533-543.
Southern Regional Education Board (2007). SREB Leadership Curriculum Modules. Atlanta,
GA: SREB
Sue-Chan, C. and Latham, G. P. (2004). The relative effectiveness of external, peer, and
self-coaches. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 53(2), 260-278.
Verstegen, D. (2007). Has adequacy been achieved? A study of finance and costs after a decade
of court-ordered reform. Journal of Education Reform, 32(3), 304-327.
West, M. & Petersen, P. (Eds.). (2007). School money trials: The legal pursuit of educational
adequacy. Washington, D. C.: Brookings Institute Press.
Wheatley, M. J. (2007). Finding our way: Leadership for an uncertain time. San Francisco, CA:
Berrett-Koehler Publishers, Inc.
Whitmore, J. (2005). Coaching for performance. London: Nicholas Brealey Publishing.
Websites for General Information:
http://www.aare.edu.au/03pap/mul03491.pdf
http://www.balancedcurriculum.com/book.htm
http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/
http://www.gapsc.com/TeacherEducation/Rules/505-3-.58.pdf
http://www.galeaders.org/site/news/newitems/news_06162005_001.htm
http://www2.bc.edu/~hargrean/docs/seven_principles.pdf
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2008022
Websites Specific To Projects in the Syllabus:
http://cef.org/NEWWEBPAGE/Budget%20Responses/CEF%20Budget%20Responses%20FY09
.pdf
Budget Responses: Fiscal Year 2009
http://nces.ed.gov/pubsearch/pubsinfo.asp?pubid=2008022Digest of Education Statistics to 2007
18
09.24.08. EDL 8820
EDL Concentration for EdS
19
http://nces.ed.gov/EDFIN/
Education Finance Statistics Center: Financial information on public K-12 education. Site
includes data and graphs, litigation, cost adjustments, searchable public school district finance
data for peer comparison, and education finance data publication.
http://www.census.gov/govs/www/school.html
U.S. Census Bureau’s Federal, State, and Local governments Public Elementary and Secondary
Education Finance Data: Public elementary-secondary education finance data that includes
revenues, expenditures, debt, and assets of elementary and secondary public school systems.
These data are available in downloadable files and viewable tables listed by year.
http://www.charterresource.org/
National Resource on Charter Schools
http://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/view/projects/3
School Finance Redesign Project
All documents available – free
http://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/pub_sfrp_weights_jun08.pdf
What is the Sum of the Parts?
http://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/download/csr_files/sfrp_interimreport_hill.pdf
The School Finance Redesign Project: A Synthesis of Work to Date
http://www.crpe.org/cs/crpe/view/csr_pubs/188
The Importance of Methodology in Teasing Out the Effects of School Resources on Student
Achievement
http://csef.air.org
Center for special Education Finance: The Special Education Expenditure Project: Nationally
representative study of special education spending. Links for publication in PDF
http://www.ncsl.org/programs/educ/ed_finance/index.cfm
http://www.ncsl/org/programs/educ/ed_finance/index.cfm#test
State information: Information for legislators, legislative staff, and other researchers concerning
the funding of K-12 education in the United States.
http://www.gpee.org/fileadmin/files/pdf/Education_Finance.pdf
Georgia Partnership for Excellence: School Finance
19