CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
COURSE RECORD FORM
Use to add a new course, drop a course, or to make a course change.
This form is to be completed by the Department Chair and attached to the proposal.
SECTION A
 CGE-Graduate
 CUE-Undergraduate
 PST
(**For 500 or 600 level courses, joint review by CUE and CGE is needed to ensure
consistency.)
ACTION () :
 New Course (Complete Sections A & B.)
 Drop Course (Complete Section A only.)
 Change Course (Complete Section A and only areas that will change in Section B.)
DEPT NAME:_Education_ Dept Prefix/Nbr/Title _EDU _ (760) Foundations of Policy and
Legislative on Bilingualism: Implications for ASL/English Bilingual for 0-5
(If new course, enter number selected by dept.)
EFFECTIVE TERM:  Fall
IMPACT:
 Major
(3)
 Spring Summer 2012
 Minor
 Curriculum
DRAFT OF CATALOG REVISION (attach)
SECTION B (Complete only areas that will change.)
 COURSE TITLE: Foundations of Policy and Legislative on Bilingualism: Implications for
ASL/English Bilingual for 0-5
(3)
 COURSE DESCRIPTION (Attach revised description for catalog.)
 Cross-Listed with: _________________
(Dept. Prefix/Number)
 Pre-Requisites:_ Instructor or Program Director’s approval _________________
 Co-Requisites:_________________________________________________
 COURSE FEE:___________
 GRADING BASIS: ABC/NC_ _ P/NP______ Pass/Fail______ No Grade_______
 PERMISSION REQUIRED: Department__ _ Instructor _____ None __________
 COURSE COMPONENT:
Lecture_ _ Laboratory_____ Seminar _____ Field Studies_____ Self-Paced_____
Supervision _____ Thesis Research _____ Practicum/Internship_____ Online _ __
Dean’s
Signature:______________________________________Date:______________________
FOR REGISTRAR’S OFFICE ONLY:
People Soft Course ID#______________________ Entered into PeopleSoft Date: ______________
Registrar’s Office Signature: _________________________________________________________
Distribution by Registrar to: Provost, Dean, Department Chair, CUE/CGE Chair
10/7/11
1
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
10/7/11
2
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
CGE PROPOSAL FOR NEW GRADUATE COURSES
CHECKLIST FOR INDIVIDUALS PREPARING PROPOSALS:
__Prepare the syllabus and proposal according to CGE guidelines (seek advice from CGE
Curriculum Committee if needed). NB: Proposals for a new required course must be
accompanied by a CGE proposal for Graduate Program Change, explaining how the new
course will be integrated into the overall program structure.
Prepare the Course Record Form carefully to ensure that all information is recorded
correctly (e.g. exact title of course, grading basis, number of credits, course fee, if any)
and matches the contents of the proposal and syllabus. The Registrar’s Office feeds
information directly from this form into the University database.
Submit the proposal packet (proposal, syllabus, Course Record Form and Signature
(Routing) Form) to your department chair for signature.
If the proposed course is part of the PEP Unit, submit the proposal packet to PEP-C for
review and signature on the Signature (Routing) Form.
Once your department chair and (if necessary) PEP-C have signed off, submit the
proposal packet to the Assistant Dean for Curriculum, Policy, and Operations, who will
track its progress through the remaining steps of the proposal review. Please note that
at each step of the review process, the proposal may be returned to you for revisions.
Once the proposal reaches CGE, the Assistant Dean will contact you for an electronic
version of the most recent syllabus and proposal, to be posted on the CGE website.
Please be sure to always include the current date in the filenames of your proposal
and syllabus (eg. LIN510_proposal_2-12-08.doc).
DEADLINES FOR PROPOSAL SUBMISSIONS TO CGE:
The deadline for courses to be offered in the next Academic Year and appear in the
course catalog is February 15 of the current year, or the next business day. If you have
any questions about the CGE review process, please contact the CGE chair.
COURSES WITH ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS:
Proposals for courses requiring PEP-C review must complete item 15.0 at the end of this
proposal form. Proposals for 500-level courses must explicitly address differences in
requirements for graduate and undergraduate candidates wherever relevant (usually items
6.0 - 9.0. 11.0 and 14.0).
10/7/11
3
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
CGE COURSE PROPOSAL COMPONENTS:
All numbered items below must be addressed for new graduate course proposals. If
certain items do not apply to this specific course proposal, so state and briefly explain
why. Numbers 1.0 through 6.0 identify components that are binding; that is, once
the course is approved, these components can be changed only by submission of a
Proposal for Graduate Course Change to the CGE Curriculum Committee.
1.0 Department
Education
2.0 Course Number
Specify the course number. Briefly justify the course level (700-level, 800-level, etc.).
760
Justification: The 700-level courses are designed for in-service professionals who
hold teacher certification and/or seeking careers as early childhood educators as
well as for pre-service MA candidates pursuing a license in Early Childhood
Education and/or Deaf Education: K-12. The course may be open to other
candidates with program coordinator’s approval.
3.0 Course Title
EDU 760: Foundations of Policy and Legislative on Bilingualism: Implications
for ASL/English Bilingual for 0-5
4.0 Course Credits
4.1 How many credits will this course carry? Note: The standard computation of
credit is one (1) semester-hour per 50 minutes of instruction per week for an
equivalent of fifteen (15) course meetings.
3 credits
4.2 If the course includes non-classroom instruction or lab sessions, or if the credit
hours vary in some way from the standard, provide an explanation.
The course will be offered as a hybrid course including both face-to-face and
an online component.
4.3 If variable credit is proposed (e.g., 1-3 hours), explain how this will be utilized
and determined.
N.A.
5.0 Formal (Catalog) Description
Provide a formal course description of the course, adhering to length and style
characteristics of college catalog listings, including pre-requisites, fees, and any
information regarding cross-listings if applicable. The description is to be written in
the third person and must appear exactly the same on the proposal form, Course
Record form and syllabus.
This course is designed to educate candidates about state and federal education
policies, particularly as they pertain to bilingualism. In addition, the course will
10/7/11
4
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
addresses a basic working knowledge of regulations essential to the role and as
bilingual early childhood professionals. Candidates will implement policies and
regulations using the language planning framework in their work in homes,
schools and agencies, and the community. It elaborates and builds upon
knowledge and dispositions learned in foundation courses.
6.0 Prerequisites
6.1 List the prerequisites and/or co-requisites for this course.
Instructor or program coordinator’s approval
6.2 Provide a brief rationale for prerequisites and/or co-requisites,
The course is primarily for in-service professionals enrolled in the certificate
program and for pre-service MA candidates pursuing licensure in Early
Childhood Education and/or Deaf Education: K-12. The course may be open to
other candidates with program coordinator’s approval.
6.3 If prerequisites and/or co-requisites involve other departments of instruction,
provide evidence of acknowledgement and cooperation from these departments
(e.g. letters of support).
N.A.
7.0 Rationale for proposed course
7.1 Why is this course being proposed? Provide a rationale.
This course will be the first course of the program. The course will provide
candidates an introduction to the framework of the ASL/English Bilingual
Early Childhood Birth to Five Certificate Program. Candidates will gain
knowledge about the history and influences of language and bilingual
education policies from political and legislative perspectives. Candidates will
also gain understanding about the nature of language planning and advocacy
skills to become potential leaders, change agents and/or advocates for deaf and
hard of children from birth to five and their families.
7.2 Describe any actual or apparent overlap with current course offerings. If other
departments are impacted by this course, provide evidence of consultation with and
support from those departments (e.g. letters of support).
N.A.
8.0 Grading System
State whether letter-grade or pass/fail system will be utilized if the latter, provide a
brief rationale.
A letter grade system will be used.
9.0 Course Characteristics
9.1 If the course is to be cross-listed (within a single department, or across more than
one department), provide a rationale and full documentation of steps taken to assure
such listings.
N.A.
10/7/11
5
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
9.2 If the course is open to both undergraduate and graduate candidates, provide a
rationale for doing so and explain any differences in requirements for undergraduate
and graduate candidates.
N.A
9.3 Explain how this course fits with the other department offerings. Is this course a
required course (in which case it must be accompanied by a proposal for Change to
Existing Program) or an elective course?
N.A.
9.4 Describe the intended candidate-audience for this course. If substantial numbers
of candidates from outside the department are expected to enroll in this course,
provide evidence of support and cooperation from these departments in terms of
enrollment and compatible scheduling.
The course is intended for in-service professionals who hold teaching
certification and seeking careers as early childhood education professionals,
mentors, childcare program directors or other positions related to the care and
education of children ages birth through five years old. The course is also
available to graduate candidates who are pursuing a licensure in General
Education: ECE and/or K-12 Deaf Education. The course may be open to other
candidates with program coordinator’s approval.
9.5 What is the anticipated starting date for this course? How frequently and in which
semester(s) will the course be offered in the future? How many sections of this course
will typically be offered simultaneously?
The anticipated starting date for this course is Summer 2012. This course will
be offered once per calendar year during the summer semester. It is anticipated
that there will be one session offered each summer.
10.0 Instructor
Describe necessary instructor competencies and qualifications to teach the course.
The instructor must possess knowledge of language and bilingual legislation
and policies as well as on language planning in Deaf and bilingual education
Qualifications include:




A minimum of 3 years of teaching experience in Early Childhood Education
(birth to 3rd grade) and/or hold extensive knowledge and/or experience in
educating young deaf children in ASL/English bilingual environments
ASL fluency
Minimum requirement of a Masters Degree, Ph.D., preferred; degree must be
in a field of education
Has expertise in policy in general and ASL/English bilingualism as well as
language planning aspects
11.0 Course Format and Procedures
10/7/11
6
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Describe how the course will be conducted, in terms of class meetings and teaching
procedures. For example, will the course be taught online only, or as a hybrid of
online and classroom meetings? Will the course incorporate lectures, discussions, lab
sessions, small-group or individualized instruction, practicum or field experiences,
candidate reports or projects, competency-based modules, or other types of
instructional procedures?
It will have an online and face-to-face component. The class will first meet faceto-face daily for two weeks during the summer. The course will continue online
for three weeks. The course format will consist of lectures, discussion postings
both in ASL and English, and candidates’ completion of reports and projects.
See a chart of the course offerings in the main program proposal.
12.0 Evaluation of Course and Course Instructor
Describe how course instruction and the course itself will be evaluated,
including any long-term strategies for evaluating the course as part of the
department offerings.
The instructor and course will be evaluated through the standard department
evaluation procedures (including course evaluations completed by candidates)
and university requirements for program and course review.
13.0 Resources
Describe the immediate and future impact the offering of this course is likely to have
on the department's personnel, physical, and financial resources.
The Department of Education will need to have at least one adjunct to cover
courses that faculty cannot accept due to current teaching load. Although the
resources may be costly, there will be return on investment due to increased
enrollment and revenues.
Facility Resources

Gallaudet University library has the largest collection of Deaf related
publications, journals and texts. In addition candidates have access to a
number of libraries in the DC area through the consortium. Candidates’
needs will be more than adequately met by these resources.

The Center on American Sign Language and English Bilingual Education and
Research that is housed under the Office of Dean and the Graduate School
and Professional Programs that also has rich curricula and materials
designed for training in-service and pre-service professionals.
E-Learning Lab is a staff-support computer lab for faculty, staff and
candidates who seek technical assistance (i.e., interactive presentations,
videos, DVDs, etc.)
The candidates have access to the Department of Education Computer Lab for
technical support.


14.0 Alignment of proposed course goals with those of academic program
14.1 Program mission statement
10/7/11
7
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
The American Sign Language and English Bilingual Early Childhood Education:
Birth to 5 Program prepares professionals to advocate for and educate young Deaf
and Hard of Hearing children and families from diverse cultural, linguistic, and
socio-economic backgrounds
14.2 Program Candidate Learning Outcomes
List the Candidate Learning Outcomes for your academic program.
Program Outcomes:
1. The candidate exhibits knowledge of and applies theories, concepts, and practices of
ASL and English bilingual early childhood education in ways that are meaningful for
diverse deaf and hard of hearing children, their families, and community.
2. The candidate engages in critical reflective practices for improving professional
performance as it applies to their work in the home, center, and school.
3. The candidate engages in continuous self-examination for personal and professional
development.
4. The candidate demonstrates knowledge of public policy and laws that apply to the 0-5
populations by advocating for the child and family.
5. The candidate demonstrates leadership or partnership by functioning as a change
agent to influence and improve the education of deaf and hard of hearing children
through advocacy, community action, and collaboration in educational settings.
6. The candidate demonstrates the ability to effectively communicate with children,
families, and other professionals using ASL and English.
7. The candidate demonstrates the ability to use assessments ethically and appropriately
to evaluate the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional and physical development of the
child.
8. The candidate plans, implements, and evaluates effective educational practices based
upon knowledge of child development, early language and cognitive development, of
early childhood education and bilingual practices and the diverse characteristics of the
child, the family, and the community.
9. The candidate demonstrates the critical thinking skills necessary to analyze, evaluate
and use information from research in the field of ASL/English bilingual early childhood
education.
10. The candidate demonstrates knowledge and skills related to visual and auditory
technologies used by deaf and hard of hearing children to provide visual and auditory
access and support the child’s language development.
11. The candidate demonstrates an understanding of the diverse learning styles of
children by creating learning opportunities to meet their individual needs. .
12. The candidate fosters collaborative relationships with professionals, families, and the
community to support the overall development of the children.
14.3 Course Candidate Learning Outcomes
List the Candidate Learning Outcomes for your proposed course. Then in table
format, using the template provided below, list the learning outcomes and show
how the course and program SLOs align by placing checks in the appropriate cells.
See Table 1
10/7/11
8
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
14.4 Learning Opportunities
Briefly describe the Learning Opportunities (eg. assignments, projects, activities,
reports, field experiences, etc.) designed to achieve the course Candidate
Learning Outcomes. List them in table format, using the template provided
below, and briefly state how they will be assessed (eg. what assessment
methods will be used?).
See Table 1
14.5 Assessment Methods
Attach assessment tools used in this course (include grading scales, rubrics,
checklists, etc.) to the syllabi accompanying this proposal. Do not attach them to
the proposal itself.
See Appendix A
Table 1
American Sign Language & English Bilingual Early Childhood Education:
Birth to Five Certificate Program
Class Objectives:
1. Examine language
ideologies and attitudes
related to bilingualism as
well as on ASL and English
from legislative and political
perspectives.
2. Analyze the historical and
current role of social
advocacy and the role of
educators in advocating for
young children to ensure
equity and access in service
delivery via legislation and
policy.
3. Analyze and explain
underlying economic,
political, and instructional
forces that shape domestic
and international language
policies and reform efforts.
4.Gain knowledge on the
nature of language planning
on different levels (Status,
Corpus, Acquisition
&Attitude) in ASL/English
and early childhood
education
5. Critically analyze language
plans established in homes,
schools/agencies, and the
community for deaf and hard
of hearing young children
10/7/11
Learning
Opportunitie
s
Class
Discussion,
Readings
Assessmen
t Measures
Program
SLO
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Language
Policy
Analysis
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Language
Policy
Analysis
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Language
Planning Case
Study
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Language
Planning Case
MA SLO
NAEYC
1, 2, 4
Conceptual
Framewor
k
2, 3,
1, 9, 11
4c
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Language
Policy
Analysis
Rubric
5
2, 3
2, 3
4c
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Language
Policy
Analysis
Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Language
Planning
Case Study
Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Language
Planning
1, 2, 4
2, 3
1, 9, 10
4c
1, 4
2
1, 9, 11
4c
1, 2
2, 3, 4
2, 10
4c, 4d, 5
9
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
and their families.
Study
6. Demonstrate
understanding on the role of
Part B and C of the IDEA
impacting language planning
7. Implement a policy action
around a current policy issue
affecting deaf and hard of
hearing young children and
their families to advocate for
them
Class
Discussion,
Readings
8. Construct role as a leader
in the field of deaf education
through developing
leadership skills, including
actions that give evidence to
the role for education in a
democratic society.
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Policy Brief,
Social Action
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Policy Brief,
Social Action
Case Study
Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Policy Brief
Rubric,
Social
Action
Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Policy Brief
Rubric,
Social
Action
Rubric
1
2, 3, 4
1, 8
1, 4b, 4c
4
1, 2, 3, 4
1, 3
1, 2, 5
5
3, 4
9, 10, 11
1, 2, 5
Column Five: Conceptual Framework:
1.
2.
3.
4.
1.
2.
Gallaudet University’s Conceptual Framework
All school preparation programs share four key principles:
Promotes Bilingual/Bicultural Competence
Engages in Theory-Based Practice
Acts as a Reflective Change Agent
Promotes the intellectual, linguistic, and social potential of all children with a particular focus on deaf
and hard of hearing children and youth
Promotes Bilingual/Bicultural Competence
a) Fluent in ASL (S)
b) Competent in written English (S)
c) Creates a visual learning environment (S)
d) Knows the histories, cultures, and contexts of deaf/Deaf people (K)
e) Assures access to language through a variety of strategies (S)
f) Develop lessons that address diverse linguistic backgrounds of candidates (S)
g) Communicates effectively across diverse cultures, varying education & cognitive levels (S)
h) Works effectively within a culturally diverse team of professionals (S)
i) Values and responds to language diversity and development in candidates (S, D)
j) Demonstrates leadership, advocacy and the ability to navigate biculturally (S, D)
Engages in Theory-Based Practice
a) Shows knowledge of subject matter (K)
b) Utilizes subject matter knowledge to prepare and teach curriculum that supports learning of
content by all candidates (S)
c) Knows how children and youth develop and the implications of that development for teaching
and learning (K)
d) Modifies professional practice to be appropriate for diverse candidates including multiple
language, ethnicity, multiple and varied intelligences, gender, and abilities (S)
e) Uses knowledge of learners and learning to assess, plan professional practice, respond, assess,
and revise professional practice (action research) (S)
f) Locates professional resources for self, candidates, families, and communities through a variety of
technologies (S, D)
10/7/11
10
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
3.
4.
g) Critically examines theory and research in order to apply to professional practice (S, D)
h) Models a passion for learning and teaching (D)
Acts as a Reflective Change Agent
a) Identifies one’s own strengths, weaknesses, and learning needs and is resourceful in building their
capacity as a professional (S, D)
b) Gathers evidence of the impact of their professional practice; analyzes evidence, reflects, decides
what to do next (S)
c) Identifies own biases, values, beliefs, worldview, and the impact of these on their relationships
with learners (S, D)
d) Collaborates with others in ways that enhance their knowledge, skills, and dispositions as a
professional (S)
e) Interacts ethically and professional at all times with candidates, families, colleagues and
community members (D)
f) Advocates for learners and for social justice (S, D)
Promotes the intellectual, linguistic, and social potential of all children with a particular focus on deaf
and hard-of-hearing children and youth.
a) Understands learners in the context of their environment and culture and modifies professional
practices to be culturally appropriate to learners (K, S)
b) Monitors and evaluates one’s own values and their effects on practice and diverse groups (S, D)
c) Shows respect and sensitivity in words and actions towards those who are culturally different
from self (D)
d) Demonstrates a belief that all children and families can learn and a commitment to enabling
learning for all (D)
e) Demonstrates a rapport with diverse candidates that reflects respect for and acceptance of their
potential for improvement and success (S, D)
f) Shows a commitment to continue to learn new knowledge and skills in order to work effectively
with diverse learners (D)
Column Six: MA Program Candidate Learning Objectives
MA Program Candidate Learning Objectives (Based on “INTASC+2” Principles and CEC Standards)
1. Content Knowledge and Pedagogy
The teacher-candidate applies the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the discipline he
or she teaches to create learning experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for
all learners.
2. Human Development
The teacher-candidate uses knowledge of how children learn and develop to provide learning
opportunities that support any child’s intellectual, social, and personal development.
3. Adapting Instruction for Diverse Learners
The teacher-candidate uses knowledge of how candidates differ in their learning approaches to create
instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners.
4. Instructional Strategies
The teacher-candidate uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage candidate development of
critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills.
5. Motivation and Classroom Management
The teacher-candidate uses an understanding of individual and group motivation and behavior to create
a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and
self-motivation in all learners.
6. Communication and Technology
The teacher-candidate uses knowledge of effective verbal, non-verbal, and media communication
techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive interaction in the classroom.
7. Planning
The teacher-candidate plans instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, diverse learner
characteristics, the community, and the curriculum goals.
8. Assessment and Evaluation
The teacher-candidate uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the
continued intellectual, social, and physical development of all learners.
9. Reflection and Professional Development
10/7/11
11
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
The teacher-candidate is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of his or her
choices and actions on others (learners, parents and other professionals in the learning community) and
who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally.
10. School and Community Relationships
The teacher-candidate fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and agencies in the larger
community to support diverse candidates’ learning and well-being.
11. Personal Characteristics and Interpersonal Skills*
The teacher-candidate demonstrates skills, beliefs, dispositions, and behaviors that guide his or her
interactions with learners, families and colleagues during professional practice, problem solving and
decision-making.
12. Literacy and Numeracy*
The teacher-candidate applies varied strategies designed to develop and enhance the literacy and
numeracy skills of all learners, including the presentation of ideas and conceptual understandings in
verbal and nonverbal, print and non-print modalities.
(*Department of Education’s additions to INTASC)
Column Seven: National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Professional
Preparation Standards
Standard 1. Promoting Child Development and Learning
Candidates use their understanding of young children’s characteristics and needs, and of multiple
interacting influences on children’s development and learning, to create environments that are
healthy, respectful, supportive, and challenging for all children.
Standard 2. Building Family and Community Relationships
Candidates know about, understand, and value the importance and complex characteristics of
children’s families and communities. They use this understanding to create respectful, reciprocal
relationships that support and empower families, and to involve all families in their children’s
development and learning.
Standard 3. Observing, Documenting, and Assessing to Support Young Children and Families
Candidates know about and understand the goals, benefits, and uses of assessment. They know about
and use systematic observations, documentation, and other effective assessment strategies in a
responsible way, in partnership with families and other professionals, to positively influence
children’s development and learning.
Standard 4. Teaching and Learning
Candidates integrate their understanding of and relationships with children and families; their
understanding of developmentally effective approaches to teaching and learning; and their
knowledge of academic disciplines to design, implement, and evaluate experiences that promote
positive development and learning for all children.
Sub-Standard 4a. Connecting with children and families
Candidates know, understand, and use positive relationships and supportive interactions as the
foundation for their work with young children.
Sub-Standard 4b. Using developmentally effective approaches
Candidates know, understand, and use a wide array of effective approaches, strategies, and tools to
positively influence children’s development and learning.
Sub-Standard 4c. Understanding content knowledge in early education
Candidates understand the importance of each content area in young children’s learning. They know
the essential concepts, inquiry tools, and structure of content areas including academic subjects and
can identify resources to deepen their understanding.
Sub-Standard 4d. Building meaningful curriculum
Candidates use their own knowledge and other resources to design, implement, and evaluate
meaningful, challenging curriculum that promotes comprehensive developmental and learning
outcomes for all young children.
10/7/11
12
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Standard 5. Becoming a Professional
Candidates identify and conduct themselves as members of the early childhood profession. They
know and use ethical guidelines and other professional standards related to early childhood practice.
They are continuous, collaborative learners who demonstrate knowledgeable, reflective, and critical
perspectives on their work, making informed decisions that integrate knowledge from a variety of
sources. They are informed advocates for sound educational practices and policies.
Gallaudet University
Department of Education
Foundations of Policy and Legislative perspectives on Bilingualism:
Implications for ASL/English Bilingual for 0-5
Instructor Information: TBA
EDU 760
Course (Date, Time & Location) Information: Summer 1: Hybrid (On
campus/Online)
Course Description:
This course is designed to educate candidates about state and federal education policies,
particularly as they pertain to bilingualism. In addition, the course will addresses a basic
working knowledge of regulations essential to the role and as bilingual early childhood
professionals. Candidates will implement policies and regulations using the language
planning framework in their work in homes, schools and agencies, and the community.
It elaborates and builds upon knowledge and dispositions learned in foundation courses.
Credits and Grading
This course carries three (3) credits. Letter grades are earned.
Relationship of Course to Issues of Diversity, Multiculturalism, and Social Justice
Educational issues related to linguistic and cultural diversity are embedded
throughout the course content, readings, discussions, and activities. The course
emphasizes awareness and sensitivity to learners’ language and cultural diversity,
and the influences of social, cultural and/or multicultural diversity on learning and
educational planning, especially with bilingual users of ASL and English. This course
contributes to the preparation of in-service and pre-service educators to address
the linguistic and socio-cultural needs of increasingly diverse learners.
Relationship of Course to Research and Technology
Reading assignments, reports, and other projects will require familiarity with
research related to language and bilingual policies and legislation, including
language planning in ASL and English bilingual education. Instructor-led and/or
candidate-led class sessions may include (but are not limited to) the use of
10/7/11
13
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
technological applications such as Blackboard, Microsoft PowerPoint, SmartBoard,
Internet links, and other applicable technology, software, or media.
Incorporation of ASL/English Bilingual Education:
This course incorporates language and bilingual education policies and legislation
impacting language planning in ASL/English bilingual educational settings.
Philosophy: ASL/English Bilingual Education:
ASL/English Bilingual Education truly emphasizes the equal importance of ASL and
English as the languages in the classroom, in the school, in the community, and in society
in general.
ASL/English Bilingual Education envisions high academic achievement for deaf and
hard-of-hearing candidate proficient in ASL and English through professional
development in assessment and curriculum, parent involvement, and technology. The
linguistic human rights of Deaf learners in the USA to acquire ASL and English for
maximum accessibility must be recognized.
Statement on Honesty and Academic Integrity
Teacher candidates are expected to adhere to policies of the university and the
education department in matters of academic integrity, including but not limited to
representations of authorship and sources in course assignments and products,
research reporting, and in materials included in candidate portfolios. Plagiarism is
not tolerated. Candidates are expected to familiarize themselves with the
university’s Policy on Academic Integrity, available in the current on-line graduate
catalog. Where applicable in research reporting and other formal written work, the
use of the most recent edition of the Publication Manual of the American
Psychological Association (APA) will be required.
http://My.gallaudet.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/Public/CUE-AcademicIntegrity08-21-07.doc
Statement on Equal Opportunity/Nondiscrimination and Candidate with
Disabilities
This course adheres to the university guidelines
on equal opportunity and nondiscrimination. (See 2011-2012 Graduate School
Catalog, p.8). Candidates with disabilities have the right and responsibility to
formally request accommodations through the Office of Candidates with Disabilities
(OSWD) at the beginning of the semester.
http://oswd.gallaudet.edu/Candidate_Affairs/Candidate_Support_Services/Office_fo
r_Candidates_With_Disabilities/General_Information/Academic_Accommodations_P
olicy.html
Required Books:
Garcia, O. (2009). Bilingual Education in the 21st Century: A Global Perspective.
Malden: MA, Wiley-Blackwell.
Kieff, J. (2009). Informed Advocacy in Early Childhood Care & Education: Making a
Difference for Young Children and Families. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
10/7/11
14
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Reagan, T. (2010). Language Policy & Planning for Sign Languages. Washington, DC:
Gallaudet University Press.
Swanwick R. & Gregory, S. (2007). Sign Bilingual Education: Policy & Practice. (UK)
http://www.bris.ac.uk/Depts/DeafStudiesTeaching/bil/papers/sign_bilingu
al_statement.pdf
Articles:
Benedict, B. & Raimondo, B. (2003). Family Rights, Legislation, and Policies: What
professionals need to know to promote family involvement and advocacy. In
B. Bodner-Johnson & M. Sass-Lehrer (Eds). The Young Deaf or Hard of
Hearing Child: A Family-Centered Approach to Early Education. (pp. 61-95).
Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing.
Espinosa, L. M. (2008). Challenging Common Myths About Young English Language
Learners. Foundation for Child Development. FCD Policy Brief Advancing PK3. January 2008. http://www.fcdus.org/usr_doc/MythsOfTeachingELLSEspinosa.pdfNational Association of the Deaf [NAD]. Early Intervention for Infants and Toddlers.
Retrieved from http://www.nad.org/issues/early-intervention
NECTAC. (2011). Early Intervention Program for Infants and Toddlers with
Disabilities
(Part C of IDEA). Retrieved from http://www.nectac.org/partc/partc.asp
Nover, S. (1995). Politics & Language: American Sign Language and English in Deaf
Education. In C. Lucas (Ed.). Sociolinguistics in Deaf Communities (pp. 109163). Washington, DC: Gallaudet University Press.
Reagan, T. (2011). Ideological barriers to American Sign Language: Unpacking
linguistic
Resistance. Sign Language Studies, 11(4), and 606-635.
Ruiz, R. (2004). Orientations in language planning. NABE Journal, 8(2), 15-34.
Siegel, L. (2006). The argument for a constitutional right to communicate and
language.
Sign Language Studies, 6(3), 255-272.
Small, A. & Cripps, J. (2009). Attitude Planning: Constructing A Language Planning
Framework Toward Empowerment In Deaf Education. In: Reference Guide:
Barrier Free Education, Toronto, Ontario: The Canadian Hearing Society.
Small, A., & Cripps, J. (2011). On Becoming: Developing an Empowering Cultural
Identity Framework for Deaf Youth and Adults. Toronto, Ontario: Ministry of
Children and Youth Services.
10/7/11
15
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Snoddon, K. (2009). Equity in education: signed languages and the courts. Current
Issues
in Language Planning, 10 (3), 255-271.
Swanswick, R. & Tsverik, I. (2007). The role of sign language for deaf children with
cochlear implants: Good practice in sign bilingual settings. Deafness and
Education International, 9(4), 314-231.
Course Format
The course will incorporate lectures, discussions, blackboard discussions and postings,
small-group and large-group activities, and candidate reports/projects.
Teacher Candidates’ Learning Outcomes:
The following teacher candidates’ learning outcomes are connected with ten
standards established by the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support
Consortium (INTASC), Gallaudet’s Conceptual Framework, NAEYC Professional
Standards and MA Program Candidate Learning Objectives (MA SLO). (See the last
three pages of this syllabus for the list of principles and the framework.)
Course Objectives
The following course objectives are connected with American Sign Language & English
Early Childhood Education Certificate Program Candidate Learning Outcomes, ten
standards established by the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium
(INTASC), Gallaudet’s Conceptual Framework, and NAEYC Standards. (See Appendix A for
the list of principles and the framework.)
By the end of the course, teacher candidates will be able to:
Class Objectives:
1. Examine language
ideologies and attitudes
related to general
bilingualism as well as on
ASL and English from
legislative and political
perspectives.
2. Analyze the historical and
current role of social
advocacy and the role of
educators in advocating for
young children to ensure
equity and access in service
delivery via legislation and
policy.
3. Analyze and explain
underlying economic,
political, and instructional
forces that shape domestic
and international language
policies and reform efforts.
10/7/11
Learning
Opportunitie
s
Class
Discussion,
Readings
Assessmen
t Measures
Conceptual
Framewor
k
2, 3,
MA SLO
Progra
m SLO
NAEYC
1, 9, 11
1, 2, 4
4c
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Language
Policy
Analysis
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Language
Policy
Analysis
Rubric
2, 3
2, 3
5
4c
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Language
Policy
Analysis
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Language
Policy
Analysis
2, 3
1, 9, 10
1, 2, 4
4c
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric
16
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
4.Gain knowledge on the
nature of language planning
on different levels (Status,
Corpus, Acquisition
&Attitude) in ASL/English
and early childhood
education
5. Critically analyze language
plans established in homes,
schools/agencies, and the
community for deaf and hard
of hearing young children
and their families.
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Language
Planning Case
Study
6. Demonstrate
understanding on the role of
Part B and C of the IDEA
impacting language planning
7. Implement a policy action
around a current policy issue
affecting deaf and hard of
hearing young children and
their families to advocate for
them
Class
Discussion,
Readings
8. Construct role as leaders in
the field of deaf education
through developing
leadership skills, including
actions that give evidence to
the role for education in a
democratic society.
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Policy Brief,
Social Action
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Language
Planning Case
Study
Class
Discussion,
Readings,
Policy Brief,
Social Action
Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Language
Planning
Case Study
Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Language
Planning
Case Study
Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Policy Brief
Rubric,
Social
Action
Rubric
Attendance
/Participati
on Rubric,
Policy Brief
Rubric,
Social
Action
Rubric
2
1, 9, 11
1, 4
4c
2, 3, 4
2, 10
1, 2
4c, 4d, 5
2, 3, 4
1, 8
1
1, 4b, 4c
1, 2, 3, 4
1, 3
4
1, 2, 5
3, 4
9, 10, 11
5
1, 2, 5
Course Requirements & Expectations:
1. Attendance & Participation 20%
This course requires active discussion and contribution from each member of the
class. Each teacher candidate is expected participate in all presentations and
activities. This means that candidates are expected to prepare for class, active
listening, and contribution to discussions, and support peers’ contribution.
Participation grades will be negatively impacted for candidates who do not
complete assignments on time, are late or miss class.
2. Assignments 80%
A. Language Policy Analysis (20%)
Select one language policy and analyze political, economic, and instructional
forces towards implementation of the policy and address how such the policy
impacts on ASL/English bilingual learners and/or programs. Written paper
must be between 5-8 pages, with 12-point font. In the event that citations are
10/7/11
17
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
needed, follow APA format or signed text must be between 7-10 minutes
presented in a clear, easily accessible format (i.e., MyThread, YouTube link).
Citations must be complete and accessible.
B. Policy Brief (20%)
Choose a current issue affecting deaf and hard of hearing children (i.e.
information sharing about language and communication for families, language
rights, bilingualism, equal access to information, etc.) and develop a handout (3-5
pages) for policymakers, organizations, and individuals to advocate policies on
your issues. In your brief, identify clearly what the argumentation on your issue
is, the implication of the policy, and what needs to change. Explain who is
impacted by current policy and how needs will be addressed by proposed policy
changes. Provide evidence to support your proposal using research. Provide a
clear, workable solution and an identifiable action. Format your paper using the
6th edition of the APA Style Guide.
C. Advocacy Action & Reflection (20%)
Return to your home and implement a policy action related to current issues
affecting deaf/hard of hearing children (You may use the same topic from your
policy brief). Submit artifacts and evidences of the action 5-8 pages and critical
reflection discussing the outcomes and what was learned.
Candidates will do the following:
1. Decide Broad Issues
2. Do Research on the Topic
a. Incorporate multiple perspectives from different sources
3. Identify Narrow Advocacy Issue and Target Audience
4. Develop strategic plan for Advocacy
5. Implement the Action
6. Show evidence of the Action
7. Reflect on the outcomes of the action
The action may include attending or presenting at a public hearing, preparing a
letter to an editor of a local newspaper or to a local, state or federal policymaker,
visiting a policymaker, and others as appropriate. It may also include a social
media component. This may include the following:
a) Joining an education group on Facebook and participating in discussions;
b) Following an education leader on Twitter and Tweeting about your topic;
c) Following an education blog and commenting on entries;
d) Starting your own blog, fan page or Twitter account for your issue;
e) Recruiting family, friends, and colleagues to your issue.
f) Making and posting a brief video on your issue on YouTube.
D. Language Planning Case Study (20%)
Investigate language plans (Status, Acquisition, Corpus and Attitude) and
policies including IDEA regulations in your local program or communities
that serve young deaf and hard of hearing children and their families.
Identify areas of strengths and needed improvements. Write a report with
10/7/11
18
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
recommendations for implementation of language plans. (Number of pages is
TBA)
Grading will be based on:
Attendance and Participation
20%
Assignments
80%
100%
Grading Scale:
A+
A
AB+
B
BC+
C
CF
=
100-97
=
94-96
=
93-90
=
89-87
=
84-86
=
83-80
=
79-77
=
74-76
=
75-70
= 69/ below
10/7/11
19
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Meeting Date
Face-to-Face
Week 1
Day 1
Tentative Schedule
(This subject is subject to change. Any changes will be put in writing.)
Topic
Readings
Assignments
Introductions
Syllabus Review
Espinoza, 2008
Introduction of linguistic
Reagan, 2010-Chapter 1 & 2
issues and challenges for
young children and families
Face-to-Face
Week 1
Day 2
Language Ideologies
Historical perspectives on
Language Policies
Language Rights
Garcia, Chapter 6
Snoddon, 2009
Reagan, 2010, Chapter 3
Bilingual Education Policies
Garcia, Chapter 7 & 8
Bilingual Education Policies
in Deaf Education
Swanwick & Gregory, 2007
Introduction to Language
Planning (Corpus, Status)
bilingualism/ECE
Language Planning
(Acquisition, Attitude)
bilingualism/ECE
Advocacy Strategies
Nover, 1995,
Ruiz, 1984
Face-to-Face
Week 1
Day 3
Face-to-Face
Week 1
Day 4
Face-to-Face
Day 1
Week 5
Face-to-Face
Week 2
Day 6
Face-to-Face
Week 2
Day 7
Face-to-Face
Week 2
Day 8
Face-to-Face
Week 2
Day 9
Face-to-Face
Week 2
Day 10
Reagan, 2011
Working with families and
communities
The role of the Individual
with Disabilities Education
Act (IDEA) on language
planning
The role of Early Hearing
Detection & Intervention Act
(EDHI) for language planning
Policy Brief: Advocating for
young deaf children and
families
Language Policy Analysis
Small & Cripps, 2011
Bodner-Johnson & Benedict, 2003
Kieff, pp.1-76
NECTAC (IDEA Part C)
NAD website on Early Intervention
for Infants and Toddlers
EHDI Act website
Kieff, pp. 97-158
Online
Week 3
Policy Brief Sharing
Online
Week 4
Language Planning:
Analyze language plans and
policies
Language Planning Case Study
Social Action/Community,
programs, schools, families
Social Action
Online
Week 5
10/7/11
Policy Brief
20
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Attendance and Participation Rubric:
Assessment
Possible
Points
Correspondin
g Letter Grade
9/10
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
(face-to-face)
No
absences,
no tardies
and
remains
for the full
length of
class (e.g.
no lengthy
breaks,
early
departures
).
No
absences
(but has a
tardy,
lengthy
break, or
early
departure)
.
(limit to 2)
No
absences
(but has
several
tardies, or
lengthy
breaks, or
early
departures
).
3 absences
(or
frequent
tardies, or
lengthy
breaks, or
early
departures
).
3 absences
(and
several
tardies, or
lengthy
breaks, or
early
departures
).
3 absence
(and
frequent
tardies, or
lengthy
breaks, or
early
departures
).
4 absences
(and
several
tardies or
lengthy
breaks, or
early
departures
).
4 absences
(and
frequent
tardies, or
lengthy
breaks, or
early
departures
).
Approximate
description of
conduct to
determine
points
awarded
(both online
and face-toface)
4 absences
and rarely
shows up
on time or
stays full
length of
class.
Participates actively in discussions, but
does not dominate the discussion;
actively listens to the contributions of
others and adds to or expands on
them; contributions to discussion
indicate preparedness for the
discussion and a high degree of
reflection about the topics discussed;
brings up relevant questions to
challenge thinking and understanding.
Participates in discussions most of the
time; participates voluntarily for the
most part, but sometimes has to be
prompted; occasionally dominates
discussion rather than considers and
expands on contributions made by
classmates; contributions indicate
preparedness most of the time;
sometimes brings up relevant
questions to challenge thinking and
understanding; most contributions are
relevant to the topic.
Participates in discussions occasionally,
perhaps only when called upon;
sometimes indicates a lack of
preparedness for the discussion; rarely
acknowledges or expands on
contributions of classmates; rarely
brings up relevant questions to
challenge thinking and understanding;
comments often not relevant to the
topic.
Communication is consistently
clear and understood by class
peers.
Communication is usually clear
and understood by class peers.
Communication is understood with
difficulty by class peers.
Language Policy Analysis Rubric
Criteria
Unsatisfactory
Chooses one policy provision or strategy related to
language policy or bilingual education policy
Conducts a critical analysis of the policy design that
includes:
2) A review of important litigation (case law)
3) National data related to the provision
4) Key position papers or statements from an
advocacy organization and a professional association.
Includes a critical analysis of implementation processes
and outcomes
Identifies key issues related to the policy provision
Develops appropriate recommendations for addressing
the issue (policy amendments or other actions)
Uses professional language appropriate for the audience.
Remains within the suggested length of 5-8 doublespaced pages, including references.
Implements APA formatting requirements.
10/7/11
Satisfactory
Exemplary
21
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Grading:
A = All criteria are exemplary
B = All criteria are satisfactory
C = All criteria are unsatisfactory
Policy Brief Rubric
Criteria
Unsatisfactory Satisfactory
Chooses one current issue affecting deaf and hard of
hearing young children and their families and the issue
is timely
Use of literature and related material in books:
 Research-based information is the basis of the points that
are made rather than opinion or political or social
arguments.
 Demonstrates substantive knowledge of the key literature
relevant to the question and explains the salient themes
and ideas with great precision.
Logic and argumentation:
 All ideas in the paper flow logically
 The argument is identifiable, reasonable, and sound
 Author makes connections to outside material and/or
material from the class or other classes which illuminate
the issue.
 Author acknowledges and discusses counter-arguments.
 Explain who is impacted by current policy and how needs
will be addressed by proposed policy changes
Solutions & Actions:
 Develops appropriate recommendations for addressing
the issue (policy amendments or other actions)
 Provide a clear, workable solution and an identifiable
action.
Mechanics and structure:
 Sentence structure and grammar excellent;
 Correct and consistent use of citation style; bibliography
follows a 6th ed. APA style
 Paragraphs have a topic sentence and author relates
evidence and examples to the topic sentence of the
paragraph.
 Excellent transitions from point to point.
 Brief is structured as a brief. Brief uses subheadings to
provide transitions and improve readability.
 Integration of research and quoted material with
appropriate citations.
(Adapted from Stallman, 2010 http://truman.missouri.edu/docs/syllabus/8190.pdf)
Grading:
A = All criteria are exemplary
B = All criteria are satisfactory
C = All criteria are unsatisfactory
10/7/11
Exemplary
22
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Advocacy Action and Reflection Rubric
Criteria
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
Exemplary
Chooses one current issue affecting deaf and hard of
hearing young children and their families and the
issue is timely
Demonstrate knowledge about the issue:
 Share research-based information on the issue
instead of opinions or political or social arguments.
 Demonstrates substantive knowledge of the key
literature relevant to the question and explains the
salient themes and ideas with great precision.
 Incorporate multiple perspectives towards the issue
from different sources
Strategic Plan for Advocacy:
 Clearly define the target audience
 Identifies multiple opportunities and strategies for
action
 Shares clear and specific short-term and long-term
goals for addressing your issue through advocacy
Implement the Action:
 Show evidences of the action and its impact on the
issue
 Provides critical reflection on the outcomes of the
action
A = All criteria are exemplary
B = All criteria are satisfactory
C = All criteria are unsatisfactory
Language Planning Case Study Rubric
Criterion
Understanding on
the nature of
Language Planning
Analysis,
evaluation, &
recommendations
10/7/11
4
(90–100)
Demonstrates a
sophisticated
understanding
on the nature of
language
planning
Presents an
insightful and
thorough
analysis of all
issues identified;
Makes
appropriate and
powerful
connections
between the
issues identified
and the strategic
3
(80–89)
2
(70–79)
1-0
(69 or below)
Demonstrates an
accomplished
understanding on
the nature of
language planning
Demonstrates an
acceptable
understanding on the
nature of language
planning
Demonstrates an
inadequate
understanding on
the nature of
language planning
Presents a
thorough analysis
of most issues
identified
Presents a superficial
analysis of some of the
issues identified
Presents an
incomplete analysis
of the issues
identified
Makes appropriate
connections
between the issues
identified and the
strategic concepts
studied in the
reading;
Makes appropriate but
somewhat vague
connections between
the issues and
concepts studied in
the reading;
demonstrates limited
Makes little or no
connection between
the issues identified
and the strategic
concepts studied in
the reading
Sco
re
23
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Research (IDEA
regulations,
bilingual policies)
Writing mechanics
APA guidelines
10/7/11
concepts studied
in the reading;
demonstrates
complete
command of the
strategic
concepts and
analytical tools
studied
Supports
diagnosis and
opinions with
strong
arguments and
evidence;
presents a
balanced and
critical view;
interpretation is
both reasonable
and objective
Presents
detailed,
realistic, and
appropriate
recommendatio
ns clearly
supported by the
information
presented and
concepts from
the reading
Supplements
case study with
relevant and
extensive
research into the
present situation
of the company;
clearly and
thoroughly
documents all
sources of
information
Writing
demonstrates a
sophisticated
clarity,
conciseness, and
correctness;
includes
thorough details
and relevant
data and
information;
extremely wellorganized
Uses APA
guidelines
accurately and
demonstrates good
command of the
strategic concepts
and analytical tools
studied
command of the
strategic concepts and
analytical tools
studied
Supports diagnosis
and opinions with
reasons and
evidence; presents
a fairly balanced
view;
interpretation is
both reasonable
and objective
Supports diagnosis
and opinions with
limited reasons and
evidence; presents a
somewhat one-sided
argument
Supports diagnosis
and opinions with
few reasons and
little evidence;
argument is onesided and not
objective
Presents specific,
realistic, and
appropriate
recommendations
supported by the
information
presented and
concepts from the
reading
Presents realistic or
appropriate
recommendations
supported by the
information presented
and concepts from the
reading
Presents realistic or
appropriate
recommendations
with little, if any,
support from the
information
presented and
concepts from the
reading
Supplements case
study with
relevant research
into the present
situation of the
company;
documents all
sources of
information
Supplements case
study with limited
research into the
present situation of
the company; provides
limited documentation
of sources consulted
Supplements case
study, if at all, with
incomplete research
and documentation
Writing is
accomplished in
terms of clarity
and conciseness
and contains only a
few errors;
includes sufficient
details and
relevant data and
information; wellorganized
Writing lacks clarity or
conciseness and
contains numerous
errors; gives
insufficient detail and
relevant data and
information; lacks
organization
Writing is
unfocused,
rambling, or
contains serious
errors; lacks detail
and relevant data
and information;
poorly organized
Uses APA
guidelines with
minor violations to
Reflects incomplete
knowledge of APA
guidelines
Does not use APA
guidelines
24
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
consistently to
cite sources
cite sources
Adapted from http://myedison.tesc.edu/tescdocs/Web_Courses/rubrics/CaseStudyAssignment_rubric_BUS421JUN09.htm
10/7/11
25
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Appendix A
Program Outcomes:
1. The candidate exhibits knowledge of and applies theories, concepts, and practices of ASL and
English bilingual early childhood education in ways that are meaningful for diverse deaf and
hard of hearing children, their families, and community.
2. The candidate engages in critical reflective practices for improving professional performance
as it applies to their work in the home, center, and school.
3. The candidate engages in continuous self-examination for personal and professional
development.
4. The candidate demonstrates knowledge of public policy and laws that apply to the 0-5
populations by advocating for the child and family.
5. The candidate demonstrates leadership or partnership by functioning as a change agent to
influence and improve the education of deaf and hard of hearing children through advocacy,
community action, and collaboration in educational settings.
6. The candidate demonstrates the ability to effectively communicate with children, families, and
other professionals using ASL and English.
7. The candidate demonstrates the ability to use assessments ethically and appropriately to
evaluate the cognitive, linguistic, social, emotional and physical development of the child.
8. The candidate plans, implements, and evaluates effective educational practices based upon
knowledge of child development, early language and cognitive development, of early childhood
education and bilingual practices and the diverse characteristics of the child, the family, and the
community.
9. The candidate demonstrates the critical thinking skills necessary to analyze, evaluate and use
information from research in the field of ASL/English bilingual early childhood education.
10. The candidate demonstrates knowledge and skills related to visual and auditory technologies
used by deaf and hard of hearing children to provide visual and auditory access and support the
child’s language development.
11. The candidate demonstrates an understanding of the diverse learning styles of children by
creating learning opportunities to meet their individual needs. .
12. The candidate fosters collaborative relationships with professionals, families, and the
community to support the overall development of the children.
MA Program Candidate Learning Objectives (Based on “INTASC+2” Principles and CEC Standards)
1. Content Knowledge and Pedagogy
The teacher-candidate applies the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of the
discipline he or she teaches to create learning experiences that make these aspects of
subject matter meaningful for all learners.
2. Human Development
The teacher-candidate uses knowledge of how children learn and develop to provide
learning opportunities that support any child’s intellectual, social, and personal
development.
3. Adapting Instruction for Diverse Learners
The teacher-candidate uses knowledge of how candidates differ in their learning
approaches to create instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners.
10/7/11
26
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
4. Instructional Strategies
The teacher-candidate uses a variety of instructional strategies to encourage candidate
development of critical thinking, problem solving, and performance skills.
5. Motivation and Classroom Management
The teacher-candidate uses an understanding of individual and group motivation and
behavior to create a learning environment that encourages positive social interaction, active
engagement in learning, and self-motivation in all learners.
6. Communication and Technology
The teacher-candidate uses knowledge of effective verbal, non-verbal, and media
communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive
interaction in the classroom.
7. Planning
The teacher-candidate plans instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, diverse
learner characteristics, the community, and the curriculum goals.
8. Assessment and Evaluation
The teacher-candidate uses formal and informal assessment strategies to evaluate and
ensure the continued intellectual, social, and physical development of all learners.
9. Reflection and Professional Development
The teacher-candidate is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of
his or her choices and actions on others (learners, parents and other professionals in the
learning community) and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally.
10. School and Community Relationships
The teacher-candidate fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and agencies in
the larger community to support diverse candidates’ learning and well-being.
11. Personal Characteristics and Interpersonal Skills*
The teacher-candidate demonstrates skills, beliefs, dispositions, and behaviors that guide
his or her interactions with learners, families and colleagues during professional practice,
problem solving and decision-making.
12. Literacy and Numeracy*
The teacher-candidate applies varied strategies designed to develop and enhance the
literacy and numeracy skills of all learners, including the presentation of ideas and
conceptual understandings in verbal and nonverbal, print and non-print modalities.
(*Department of Education’s additions to INTASC)
5.
6.
7.
8.
Gallaudet University’s Conceptual Framework
All school preparation programs share four key principles:
Promotes Bilingual/Bicultural Competence
Engages in Theory-Based Practice
Acts as a Reflective Change Agent
Promotes the intellectual, linguistic, and social potential of all children with a particular focus on deaf
and hard of hearing children and youth
5. Promotes Bilingual/Bicultural Competence
k) Fluent in ASL (S)
l) Competent in written English (S)
m) Creates a visual learning environment (S)
n) Knows the histories, cultures, and contexts of deaf/Deaf people (K)
o) Assures access to language through a variety of strategies (S)
p) Develop lessons that address diverse linguistic backgrounds of candidates (S)
q) Communicates effectively across diverse cultures, varying education & cognitive levels (S)
10/7/11
27
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
r) Works effectively within a culturally diverse team of professionals (S)
s) Values and responds to language diversity and development in candidates (S, D)
t) Demonstrates leadership, advocacy and the ability to navigate biculturally (S, D)
6. Engages in Theory-Based Practice
i) Shows knowledge of subject matter (K)
j) Utilizes subject matter knowledge to prepare and teach curriculum that supports learning of
content by all candidates (S)
k) Knows how children and youth develop and the implications of that development for teaching
and learning (K)
l) Modifies professional practice to be appropriate for diverse candidates including multiple
language, ethnicity, multiple and varied intelligences, gender, and abilities (S)
m) Uses knowledge of learners and learning to assess, plan professional practice, respond, assess,
and revise professional practice (action research) (S)
n) Locates professional resources for self, candidates, families, and communities through a variety
of technologies (S, D)
o) Critically examines theory and research in order to apply to professional practice (S, D)
p) Models a passion for learning and teaching (D)
7. Acts as a Reflective Change Agent
g) Identifies one’s own strengths, weaknesses, and learning needs and is resourceful in building
their capacity as a professional (S,D )
h) Gathers evidence of the impact of their professional practice; analyzes evidence, reflects, decides
what to do next (S)
i) Identifies own biases, values, beliefs, worldview, and the impact of these on their relationships
with learners (S, D)
j) Collaborates with others in ways that enhance their knowledge, skills, and dispositions as a
professional (S)
k) Interacts ethically and professional at all times with candidates, families, colleagues and
community members (D)
l) Advocates for learners and for social justice (S, D)
8. Promotes the intellectual, linguistic, and social potential of all children with a particular focus on
deaf and hard-of-hearing children and youth.
a) Understands learners in the context of their environment and culture and modifies professional
practices to be culturally appropriate to learners (K, S)
b) Monitors and evaluates one’s own values and their effects on practice and diverse groups (S, D)
c) Shows respect and sensitivity in words and actions towards those who are culturally different
from self (D)
d) Demonstrates a belief that all children and families can learn and a commitment to enabling
learning for all (D)
e) Demonstrates a rapport with diverse candidates that reflects respect for and acceptance of their
potential for improvement and success (S, D)
f) Shows a commitment to continue to learn new knowledge and skills in order to work effectively
with diverse learners (D)
Column Seven: National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) Professional
Preparation Standards
Standard 1. Promoting Child Development and Learning
Candidates use their understanding of young children’s characteristics and needs, and of multiple interacting
influences on children’s development and learning, to create environments that are healthy, respectful,
supportive, and challenging for all children.
10/7/11
28
CGE Proposal for New Graduate Course
Approved by CGE 11/03/09
Standard 2. Building Family and Community Relationships
Candidates know about, understand, and value the importance and complex characteristics of children’s
families and communities. They use this understanding to create respectful, reciprocal relationships that
support and empower families, and to involve all families in their children’s development and learning.
Standard 3. Observing, Documenting, and Assessing to Support Young Children and Families
Candidates know about and understand the goals, benefits, and uses of assessment. They know about and use
systematic observations, documentation, and other effective assessment strategies in a responsible way, in
partnership with families and other professionals, to positively influence children’s development and
learning.
Standard 4. Teaching and Learning
Candidates integrate their understanding of and relationships with children and families; their understanding
of developmentally effective approaches to teaching and learning; and their knowledge of academic
disciplines to design, implement, and evaluate experiences that promote positive development and learning
for all children.
Sub-Standard 4a. Connecting with children and families
Candidates know, understand, and use positive relationships and supportive interactions as the foundation
for their work with young children.
Sub-Standard 4b. Using developmentally effective approaches
Candidates know, understand, and use a wide array of effective approaches, strategies, and tools to positively
influence children’s development and learning.
Sub-Standard 4c. Understanding content knowledge in early education
Candidates understand the importance of each content area in young children’s learning. They know the
essential concepts, inquiry tools, and structure of content areas including academic subjects and can identify
resources to deepen their understanding.
Sub-Standard 4d. Building meaningful curriculum
Candidates use their own knowledge and other resources to design, implement, and evaluate meaningful,
challenging curriculum that promotes comprehensive developmental and learning outcomes for all young
children.
Standard 5. Becoming a Professional
Candidates identify and conduct themselves as members of the early childhood profession. They know and
use ethical guidelines and other professional standards related to early childhood practice. They are
continuous, collaborative learners who demonstrate knowledgeable, reflective, and critical perspectives on
their work, making informed decisions that integrate knowledge from a variety of sources. They are informed
advocates for sound educational practices and policies.
10/7/11
29