Purpose
The purpose of this course is for students to engage in a critical examination of contemporary literature on fundamental educational concepts, research issues, and curriculum and instruction implications. Part of such discourse may address the cognitive, cultural, social and political determinants and underpinnings of these central issues.
Philosophy
Curriculum theorizing, thinking concepts and applying them to curriculum and instruction as any other human practice, cannot be learned by talking or reading about it but requires that we participate in it. Thus, even the slightest description of how to read and think theoretical concepts underdetermines just what you have to do. It is through your own doing, reading, talking about, applying that you find the relevance in and of concepts.
So throughout this course, we engage in two types of activities: (a) reading and talking (about) major concepts and theories and (b) applying these concepts and theories to specific observations in school classrooms. These two activities stand in a dialectical and reflexive relation that constitutes each of the two sides.
Process
In this course, we will read and discuss texts in which major theoretical concepts with relevance to curriculum theorizing are featured. We also will look at specific educational situation and learn how to make links between theoretical discourses and concepts and concrete classroom situations.
For each meeting, students will read a set of assigned texts. In preparation, students will write and submit 500-word reflections. In class, (a) we will discuss texts and students? reflections, (b) the instructor will give mini-lectures on related topics, and (c) we will look at concrete examples and attempt to understand events in terms of the salient theories and concepts.
Tentative Outline
A tentative outline is available online, easily reachable from my home page (www.educ.uvic.ca/faculty/mroth). The outline may be modified to meet specific and changing needs of the students and instructor. Specific and detailed lesson outlines and additional information will be made in an ongoing manner. [Tentative and Developing Outline]
Readings
Readings will be made available in the course outline by means of a link or the location where they are available will be indicated so that students may get these at the appropriate time.
Assignments
There are four types of participation. First, students will write 500-word reflections concerning the readings for the particular lesson. These assignments are due prior to the seminar. Second, students participate in class discussions. Third, students write a major assignment in which they exhibit their competence in educational discourses (concepts, theories) and their application to a specific set of observations (provided by the instructor). All assignments are submitted electronically in WORD or PDF format. Fourth, students present the results of their work on the final assignment, which may be at an intermediary or final stage.
Course Grade
The course grade is made up of evaluations for reflections (20%), class participation (10%), major assignment (60%), and major assignment presentation (10%).
Appointments
Appointments are made by special arrangement sufficiently in advance. You may find it more convenient to write an email, which in most cases, deals with many issues. Also email me at least a day or two advance for any special appointment (mailto:mroth@uvic.ca). You may also arrange for an iCHAT (AOL) or Skype video-mediated meeting, which means you do not even have to leave where you are working at the moment.
Concept mapping materials: [transcription]
[video]
Background materials you may want to consult:
Roth, W.-M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1993). The development of science process skills in authentic contexts. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 30, 127-152.
Roth, W.-M., & Roychoudhury, A. (1992). The social construction of scientific concepts or The concept map as conscription device and tool for social thinking in high school science. Science Education, 76, 531-557.
Epistemology materials: [transcription]
Background materials you may want to consult:
Roth, W.-M., & Lucas, K. B. (1997). From "truth" to "invented reality": A discourse analysis of high school physics students' talk about scientific knowledge. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 145-179.
Roth, W.-M., & Alexander, T. (1997). The interaction of students' scientific and religious discourses: Two case studies. International Journal of Science Education, 19, 125-146.
In this assignment, you show the extent to which you understand the relation between contemporary discourses in educational studies and educational reality. As the educational context, you may take either the concept mapping materials or the epistemology materials. Both derive from my own teaching in the early 1990s.
Purpose
The purpose of this assignment is to write an essay, in which you look at all or parts of one of the two sets of materials, and show the relevance of one of the discourses that are the focus of this course. That is, your text should exhibit that you not only know about the discourses but that you can bring them to bear on classroom episodes and the implications this bearing has for future instruction. The length of your text is upwards of 5,000 words. Your text provides evidence that you have read additional materials, which you reference appropriately in APA 5th style. In general, your paper should have all the parts that a journal article has; and it should show evidence that you have developed competence in writing in the scholarly genre.
Evaluation Criteria
Any creative work is inherently difficult to evaluate. I know from the peer review process that an article may be rejected by one (or more) reviewer and be unconditionally accepted or accepted with minor revisions by another (or more) reviewers. Above all, an article has to be convincing and has a logical structure. A sample assignment that received an A+ can be found [here].
A typical evaluation grid that a journal such as the Canadian Journal of Education would use looks like this:
Excellent |
Very Good |
Good |
Poor |
|
1. Contribution to advancement of knowledge in education |
... | ... | ... | ... |
2. Originality |
... | ... | ... | ... |
3. Method |
... | ... | ... | ... |
a. Central question |
... | ... | ... | ... |
b. Theoretical framework |
... | ... | ... | ... |
c. Data analysis |
... | ... | ... | ... |
d. Interpretation |
... | ... | ... | ... |
e. Substantiation |
... | ... | ... | ... |
4. Structure of the argument |
... | ... | ... | ... |
5. Conclusion |
... | ... | ... | ... |
6. References (APA 5th style) |
... | ... | ... | ... |
Submission
Your assignment is due April 7, 2009, that is, 1 week after class ends. The assignment is to be submitted electronically to my email (mroth at uvic dot ca) in either PDF or DOC (Word) format.