CREATING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS FOR YOUNG CHILDREN

ELED 6090

Fall 2010

I GENERAL INFORMATION

Instructor: Dr. Kathleen G. Burriss

Office: Jones Hall Room 200

Class Meets: Cyber Space (On-Line)

Phone: 898-2323 - FAX: 898-5309

Email: kburriss@mtsu.edu

Home Page: http://www.mtsu.edu/~kburriss

Office Hours: 10:00 - 4:00

II. ADA

If you have a disability that may require assistance or accommodation, or if you have a question related to any accommodations for testing, note takers, readers, etc., please speak with me as soon as possible. Students may also contact the Office of Disabled Student Services (898-2783) with questions about such services.

III. KNOWLEDGE BASE

This course will provide classroom teachers with knowledge regarding young children's social, emotional, and cognitive development. Strategies and rationales with which to create optimal learning environments for young children will be provided.

IV. DIVERSITY

As identified and described in the College of Education's conceptual framework Educator as Reflective Decision-maker, ELED 6090 Creating Learning Environments for Young Children is constructed within an understanding of diversity. ELED 6090 Creating Learning Environments for Young Children ensures candidates a variety of appropriate assessment alternatives and uses technology as instruction and as a median of instruction. Using the TK20 software, the Comprehensive Assessment System (CAS) clearly aligns content and pedagogical knowledge with programmatic objectives, professional goals, and accreditation standards. Faculty draw upon multiple data sources on which to analyze, interpret, and improve their teaching practice on behalf of candidates' knowledge, skills, and dispositions.

V. COMPETENCIES

The following competencies and standards have been adopted from the "Teacher as Reflective Decision-Maker" model. The ^ indicates which course assignment meets the competency.

1. Educator understands the moral, social, emotional and cognitive learning and development of young children.

^ Literature Review, Critiques, Free Choice

2. Educator understands how to optimize learning experiences, which promote young children's unique intellectual, social, emotional and moral learning and development. Educators will understand how to construct a proactive school environments to nurture the child's life experiences.

^ Literature Review, Critiques, Class Discussions, Free Choice

VI. COURSE REQUIREMENTS

1. Two Article Critiques (15 points each)

Educators will read and summarize two refereed journal articles. The articles are to address play and classroom management. Subtopics include play and literacy, play and social and emotional development, play and the outdoors, or play and inclusive classrooms.

For example, prosocial behavior, responsive classroom management, or the inappropriate use of rewards and punishments, young children's friendships, and young children's stress are well fitted to the management article. If there is another topic of interest, please discuss with the instructor before beginning the critique. The critique should be from one-to-three pages with three components: APA reference, outline of the purpose, and Implications for classroom practice. This critique is to be written in a formal and objective voice. Approximately 750 words.

2. Literature Review (70 points)

A literature review of 10-15 pages. Only APA format is acceptable. If you are unfamiliar with APA, please check an updated APA manual. Some (20%) Internet sources may be used. APA Internet format is to be followed. Students are advised to consult with the instructor before using Internet sources. Use objective language. Do not use personal pronouns. This is not a reflective paper.

3. Class Mores-Attendance and Participation (20 points):

On the first day of class, members will determine the mores with which the class is to operate. This conduct will determine regard for other community members, participation, and cooperation. Students who demonstrate an effort to respect the class mores and indicate regard and respect for others will receive credit. Individuals who do not attend class (online discussion), do not participate and/or do not indicate regard for their colleagues will forfeit points. These criteria will also be represented in course dispositions. Timeliness counts; late posts are rude.

The nature of the online course depends on prompt responses in order to build the discussion. Important: Do not send projects as email attachments. This slows the process of the discussion. Email papers "on-line" only! Also, be careful to post your assignment in the correct thread. This will assist others in reading for meaning. Don’t forget to post your identified assignments on TK20. A grade will not be assigned if students fail to post identified assignments on the TK20.

4. Free Choice Read - A summary of the text (25 points)

Students are to read one of the texts from an identified list. You may choose one of the Howard Gardner texts regarding multiple intelligence, the brain research book by Doris Bergen & Koscia, or one of the Kohn texts on management.

Provide the class with a summary. This summary may be a four to five page paper, power point, or other. The online nature of the course does not limit students to only text responses. Think of different ways to convey your understanding of the book and be creative. When in doubt, consult with the instructor before beginning the project.

For example: see The Brain Rap by Georgette Seay. Instead of power point or a book report, Georgette created a rap in which she clearly summarizes each chapter in the Bergen and Koscia book. Julie Deffenbaugh created a newspaper describing her summary of Kohn’s classroom management perspective. If you choose to do a power point, please be sure to review the guidelines for professional powerpoints. Students not following these guidelines will forfeit points associated with format and clarity.

Identified list of readings for free choice assignment:

The Unschooled Mind; Multiple Intelligences; To Open Minds; Creating Minds

Goodlad, J. I., Soder, R. Sirotnik, K. (Eds.) (1999). The moral dimensions of teaching. San Francisco: The Jossey-Bass Education Series.

Any of the books by Kohn or Gardner

Bergen, D. & Coscia, J. (1991). Brain research and childhood education: Implications for educators. Olney, MD: Asssociation for Childhood Education International.

Note: Alternative assignment for the Free Choice Read - Students attending the September 20th, Middle Tennessee Writing Project and Association for Childhood Education International held at MTSU satisfy this requirement.

5. Final Summative (25 points): Students will design a probing, insightful and theoretically grounded question regarding children's positive learning environments; students will then answer the question. The question provides depth and breath in responding.

VII. ASSESSMENT: RUBRICS

The following rubrics are based on levels ranging from highest to least expectations.

Rubric I: Critique (15)

The educator will clearly summarize two articles from a refereed journal using APA format. The educator will demonstrate an understanding of the article by drawing implications to their classroom practice. Internet sources are acceptable but must evidence appropriate APA style.

Targeted: (14-15) Critique includes accurate APA format, a succinct outline of the relevant points, and well relates the implications with children's learning outcomes. Implications include both cognitive and affective learning and development. Objective and formal writing evident.

Acceptable: (B 12-13)(C 11) Article critique includes effort to meet APA format, identifies the main points of the article, and describes the implications for children's learning and development. Objective and formal voice evident.

Unacceptable: (below 11) APA format needs revision, main points are not clearly described, and implications for both children's affective and cognitive learning and development not identified. This designation may be made if the article chosen is not congruent with the constructivist philosophy.

Rubric II: Literature Review (70)

The paper will evidence current research describing the relationship among a constructivist philosophy, optimal learning environments for young children and an area of choice (e.g. play, friendship, using manipulatives, authentic and relevant, centers, project learning). The paper will include implications for creating relationships with parents and community members from diverse communities. In addition, the paper will include how the educator intends to create a positive classroom climate of openness, mutual respect, support, and inquiry. The paper will include organization and monitoring strategies that ensure students' independent and group activities will occur with sensitivity to cultural and gender differences. Further, the paper will indicate the educator's awareness that a classroom is expected to represent varied developmental progressions and ranges of individual variation within the physical, social, emotional, moral and cognitive domains. The paper will draw implications for the importance of classroom teachers' understanding the factors that impact classroom and individual student learning (e.g. developmental levels, interests, learning styles, multiple intelligences, needs, family environments, health and economic conditions, and community environments and resources). Further implications will demonstrate knowledge of how to incorporate this information to build student strengths. The paper will provide a rationale and plan for evaluating how to meet the needs of all learners, and demonstrate how achieving learning goals is determine by choosing alternative teaching strategies, appropriate teaching resources and curriculum materials. Finally, the paper will include how the educator gains information by linking with other student environments (e.g. parents, school personnel, professionals, and other appropriate community agencies.) The paper will reflect how the educator has analyzed the environments and has made decisions and adjustments to enhance social relationships; students' motivation/engagement, and positive learning outcomes. Strategies will be evident that promote students' critical thinking, independent problem solving, and performance capabilities. When referring to children/students, the assumption is made there will be a diverse range of differences in your classroom; evidence this understanding in the paper.

Literature Review Components:

Relevant Content (Bibliography) 30

Organization and format 20

Implications 20

Total 70

In order to ensure a comprehensive overview, the paper will be approximately 10 double-spaced pages (about 5,000 words). This does not include your title page, abstract or bibliography. Please post in TK20 as well as D2L. If assignments are not posted in TK20, a grade of “F” will be assigned.

Targeted (63-70): The paper includes the criteria identified in the syllabus description. The paper is well written, organized succinctly, and evidenced appropriate APA format.

Acceptable (B 56-62, C 49-55): Paper included many of the criteria identified in the syllabus. Effort noted to approximate APA format and succinct organization.

Unacceptable (below 49): Paper does not represent the intent of the assignment as outlined in the syllabus. Further effort is needed regarding organization, APA format, and overall organization.

Rubric III. Classroom Mores (20 points)

A rubric will be designed the first day of class by the community participants. A copy of the rubric will be provided for each class member and formative checks of approximation will be made. (Acceptable-Not Acceptable) Please recall the dispositions discussed during your Intake Interview. Recall, you will also be graded on these dispositions in this and all other graduate classes.

Points will be deducted for noncompliance.

Group members not able or willing to cooperate are requested to post independently.

Rubric IV. Free Choice (25 points)

The project represents an overall outline/understanding of a text chosen by the student. The format is the student's choice (paper, power point, photo text, poster, other). However, the text provides the audience with an overview of each chapter and a clear statement of the implications for children's learning and teachers' practice.

Targeted: (23-25)Free choice project well conceptualizes the text and supports a constructivist classroom. Context, role of the teacher, and children's learning outcomes are clearly evident. Creative/innovative representation notable. If power point alternative chosen, student followed professional guidelines.

Acceptable: (B 20-22) (C 18-19) Free choice project includes an organized summary of the text, including the content, teacher's role, and children's learning outcomes. An effort to associate content with the constructivist philosophy demonstrated. Power point assignments followed professional guidelines.

Unacceptable: (below 18) Free choice project does not relate with the constructivist philosophy. Content not clearly demonstrated, teacher's role not defined, and children's learning outcomes not included.

Rubric V. Final Summative (25 points)

The student, as an individual or in a group, will identify a question and answer. This question is an effort for the student to conceptualize the understanding of this course as it relates with teacher's instruction and children's learning.

Targeted: (23-25) Question is conceptual and requires an in-depth and insightful response. Response is theoretically grounded, explicitly constructivistic, and practically relevant.

Acceptable: (B 20-22)(C 18-19) Summative question represents the need for inquiry. Response is well written, relates with the constructivist philosophy, and provides implications for children's learning/development.

Unacceptable: (below 19)Summative question is not probing. Response is rote, text driven, and not philosophically grounded.

If students choose to work as a group, please be sure to identify all group members.

VIII. ONLINE ASSESSMENT

In addition to the regular assignments, the online section has what is referred to as "community response." In an effort to make the online section spontaneous and rich in discussion, each student is expected to respond to the weekly discussion. but, as well, make five (5) community responses throughout the semester. At least five times, each student is expected to make a spontaneous comment. In a classroom when discussing, individuals will frequently make comments or ask questions regarding a related topic. When learning online however, students sometimes neglect to respond to their colleagues and only focus on the instructor's inquiries. When this happens, online instruction becomes rote; question and answer without verbal interplay among students is dry and uninvolved. A lively weekly discussion can be undermined by task completion and word counts. The community response is an effort to prevent this from happening and ensure personal interchange among participants.

By providing for the "community response" all students are compelled to participate. While it is true that in any given class, some students are more disposed to share than others, the "community response" places a greater responsibility on all students to contribute to the discussion.

Points are associated with the "Community Response." It is not appropriate to answer "good comment," "I agree," or other one liners. This is not a engaging response. The community response is rich, thought provoking and insightful. The "community response" is when one colleague supports, disagrees, or asks a question of others. When making your weekly reports, often you will ask a question related to theory or practice. Instead of the instructor assuming sole responsibility to answer all questions, students join in and share their voices. It is disheartening when a student asks a genuine question and no one responds because they feel they already answered the assignment rubric. Be sure to label these spontaneous comments as "community response" and place in the appropriate thread. In order to receive credit, you will need to label the response with both your name and "community response."

IX. GRADING POLICY

Literature Review 70

Management/Mores 20

Critiques (15 points each) 30

Community Response 25

Summative 25

Free Choice 25

Total 205

In accordance with the College of Graduate Studies a plus or minus grade may be assigned.

A 90%

B 80%

C 70%

Note: Students are expected to post in TK20. Students not posting the Literature Review in TK20 will receive a final course grade of Incomplete. The grade remains until TK20 posting is satisfied.

X. READINGS.

Brooks, J. J. and Brooks, M. (1993). In search of understanding: A case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Katz, L. G. and McClellan, D. E. (1997). Fostering children's social competence: The teacher's role. Washington, D. C.: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

TK20 - All College of Education students are expected to purchase a TK20 password for the purpose of posting assignments and receiving grades. Students who do not purchase TK20 will not receive a grade. Caution: it takes time to initiate the TK20 account. You can not buy it one day and post the next.

Please download free copy of Real Player. This is necessary to view the two videos.

XI. ACADEMIC MISCONDUCT

Plagiarism, cheating and other forms of academic dishonesty are prohibited. Students guilty of academic misconduct, either directly or indirectly through participation or assistance, are immediately responsible to the instructor of the class. In addition to other possible disciplinary sanctions which may be imposed through the regular institutional procedures as a result of academic misconduct, the instructor has the authority to assign an F or a zero for the exercise or examination; or to assign an F in the course. If the student believes he or she has been erroneously accused of academic misconduct, and if his or her final grade has been lowered as a result, the student may appeal the case through the appropriate institutional procedures.