Syllabus Redesign Project
Doug Gilbert
Educ 116X Cotterman, Mitchell, Hayakawa
June 7, 2008
EDUCATION 417x/117x
Research and Policy on Postsecondary Access
Spring 2008
Course Objectives/Learning Outcomes
This is a service-learning course that is a focused examination on access to higher education, with particular emphasis on educational policy that impacts students' postsecondary destinations and eventual success. Our course objectives are to study the following topics:
● Adequacy of academic preparation in high school
● The roles of teachers, counselors, families, and communities in the development and realization of postsecondary aspirations
● Policy coordination between K-12 and higher education systems
● College choice and aspiration: The role of individual factors (race, class, cultural capital), family factors (parental involvement, habitus), school factors (high school context, social capital, teacher and counselor influence), and extra-institutional factors (outreach, bridge, and academic enrichment programs)
● The impact of policy on access (exit exams, placement tests/remediation, financial aid, college costs, affirmative action, admissions testing, volatile admissions policies)
● Understand key features of service-learning as it relates to empowering students to reach college.
Our learning outcomes also include the following:
● Engage in a service-learning experience with a college outreach program that connects to course curriculum and enriches understanding of important issues
● Gain a deeper understanding of the issues that local communities face in assisting students to gain access to postsecondary educational opportunities.
In this course we will examine and debate the policy issues related to postsecondary access. Our objective is to problematize access from multiple perspectives. In examining theory, empirical research, and intervention programs, as well as our first hand experiences in these programs, we will take a comprehensive look at this important educational issue.
Classroom Philosophy
The graduate seminar is a space of open discussion, inquiry, and discovery. The success of the seminar rests on the free and uninhibited intellectual and emotional engagement of all participants. Learning occurs through self-critique, peer critique, and the sharing of ideas and points of view. Therefore, I request that the class subscribe to three basic discussion rules that I find maximize learning in the classroom.
(1)Utmost respect for the thoughts and words of all in the room should be given at all times.
(2)Listen and be heard. Be attentive to the voices of others and share your voice with the group.
(3)Be personal but don’t get personal. I request that you speak from your mind and your heart, but that you speak to issues, not individuals. In other words, let us all strive to create a classroom where everyone feels safe to take risks in contributing to, and perhaps, disrupting our collective knowledge.
Grading and Assignments
Course grades will be based on the following criteria:
Classroom Participation 25%
Midterm Paper 25%
Service Learning 50%
Reflective Logs- 20%
Service Hours and Final Paper – 30%
Classroom Participation (25%)
Classroom participation includes weekly class discussion and virtual classroom reading comments.
Regarding reading responses: Go to the discussion board section of Blackboard and submit at least two posts for the week. Posts should be reactions/questions/reflections to any of the required readings for that week. One of your two posts may also be a response to a classmate's initial post. Some guidelines:
a) Post as often as you wish! The discussion board is a great forum -- the more activity, the
better.
b) Get into it! A "valid" post/response should say more than "I agree with X," or "Why do
you think that?"
As a seminar, much of our learning is dependent upon lively and engaged classroom discussion. Therefore, attendance and participation in discussion is very important and graded accordingly. Participation includes active questioning, reflection, and listening.
Midterm Paper (25%)
To culminate the first half of the course, you are asked to write a short paper on college access, focusing on a particular group of students. In the paper you should choose a subgroup (e.g., women, low-income, first generation, immigrant, African American, etc.) and summarize the issues facing this group with regard to postsecondary access. Papers should have properly formatted citations to references. The paper is limited to 5 pages, double-spaced, excluding references and is due Thursday, May 1st. Late papers will lose 1/2 grade each day they are late.
Service-Learning (50%)
● Volunteer with a pre-college organization (e.g., College-Track, AVID, or other.)
Each student is expected to develop a strong relationship with a college outreach organization locally or in the Bay Area. You are expected to tutor, mentor, challenge, and act as a resource for high school students are working towards their goal of a college education. During week 2 we will give out contact information of some possible organizations, which have all agreed to enter into this partnership with you. Students will also receive training on community and sensitivity issues. Each student is expected to complete a minimum of 30 hours of work with the organization including observation, and participation on a weekly basis. This will allow you to complete your reflections based on your meetings and information gathering.
● Weekly Reflections- Complete a 1-2 page weekly reflection on issues, problems, questions, breakthroughs, experiences that you had during your interaction at your site. This is an opportunity to explore the unique experience you are having while referencing the readings, interviews with students, and issues we are examining in class and in the readings.
● Final Presentation and Paper- Craft a 6-8 page paper that includes your final thoughts on the service-learning experience and the aspects that affect the college access process. Be sure to reference specific authors from our readings and events during your service experience. You will also present your findings to the class at an expo that will include the organizations that the class worked with.
Blackboard
I will be using Blackboard for selected aspects of the class, such as turning in assignments and
providing class feedback. To enroll in Blackboard:
1) Open a web browser and go to bb.stanford.edu .
2) Login if you have an account. If you don't have an account, use the "create" button and create an account.
3) Once you've created your account, enroll in Education 117x/417x by following these steps:
a) Click on the "Courses" tab in the upper left part of the screen
b) Click on "Browse Course Catalog" on the right part of the screen
c) Search for "Education 117x/417x"
d) Click the "Enroll" button to the right of the listing for "Research and Policy on Postsecondary Access"
e) Click the "Submit" button to confirm enrollment and then "OK" to continue
Required books
• Patricia McDonough. 1999. Choosing Colleges. How Social Class and Schools Structure
Opportunity. Albany: SUNY Press.
• Additional readings available on the internet (I) or via Blackboard – (BB)
Schedule of Meetings
Meeting One: 4/3
Overview of the course/Introduction
Theories of college choice and status attainment
Readings discussed this week:
Fitzgerald, Brian, and Delaney, Jennifer. 2002. Educational Opportunity in America. In D. Heller (ed.), Conditions of Access: Higher Education for Low Income Students. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. (BB)
Carnevale, Anthony, and Fry, Richard. 2002. The Demographic Window of Opportunity: College Access and Diversity in the New Century. In D. Heller (ed.), Conditions of Access: Higher Education for Low Income Students. Westport, CT: Praeger Publishers. (BB)
Patricia McDonough. 1999. Choosing Colleges. How Social Class and Schools Structure Opportunity. Albany: SUNY Press. (chapter 1)
Cabrera, Alberto F., and Steven M. La Nasa, Understanding the College Choice of Disadvantaged Students,” (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass) #107 Fall 2000. (chapter 1) (BB)
Meeting Two: 4/10 –
Service-Learning Components, Training, and Organizations
Guest Speaker: Karin Cotterman and Tania D. Mitchell Haas Center for Public Service
Readings discussed this week:
Koliba, C., O'Meara, K., & Seidel,R. (2000). Social Justice Principles for Experiential Education. NSEE Quarterly 26, 26-29.
Stanton T., Giles, D., & Cruz N. (1999). Helping a New Field Discover its History. Service-Learning: A Movement’s Pioneers Reflect on Its Origins, Practice and Future. (pp. 1-11). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass
Wade, Rahima (2001). “…And Justice for All” Community Service-Learning for Social Justice. Compact for Learning and Citizenship. Denver: Education Commission of the States
Zimmer, S. The Art of Knowing your Place White Service Learning Leaders and Urban Community Organizations. Reflections. A Journal of Writing, Service-Learning and Literacy.
Meeting Three: 4/17
Access: Individual-centered analyses (continued)
Readings discussed this week:
Hossler, D., Braxton, J., & Coopersmith, G. (1989). Understanding Student College Choice. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. 5). New York: Agathon Press. (BB)
Perna, Laura. 2000. Racial and ethnic group differences in enrollment decisions. [In Cabrera, Alberto F., and Steven M. La Nasa, Understanding the College Choice of Disadvantaged Students,” (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass) #107 Fall 2000. (chapter 5)] (BB)
Patricia McDonough. 1999. Choosing Colleges. How Social Class and Schools Structure Opportunity. Albany: SUNY Press. (chapter 2)
McDonough, P.M., Antonio, A.L., and Trent, J.W. (1997). Black students, black colleges: An African-American college choice model. Journal for a Just and Caring Education 3(1), 9-36. (BB)
Meeting Four: 4/24
The role of parents and significant others
Guest Speaker: Michal Kurlaender, UC Davis (SIHER seminar)
Readings discussed this week:
Patricia McDonough. 1999. Choosing Colleges. How Social Class and Schools Structure Opportunity. Albany: SUNY Press. (chapter 5, 111-139)
Lareau, A. 1987. Social Class Differences in Family-School Relationships: The Importance of Cultural Capital. Sociology of Education 60: 73-85. (I)
Ceja, Miguel. 2004. Chicana College Aspirations and the Role of Parents: Developing Educational Resiliency. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, Vol. 3, No. 4, October 2004, 338-362 (I)
Smith, Michael J. (2001) "Low-SES African American Parents: Playing the College Choice Game on an Unlevel Playing Field." Journal of College Admissions 171:16-21. (BB)
Meeting Five: 5/1
The impact of policy: College costs and financial aid
Readings discussed this week:
Patricia McDonough. 1999. Choosing Colleges. How Social Class and Schools Structure Opportunity. Albany: SUNY Press. (chapter 5, 140-148)
Heller, Donald. 1999. The Effects of Tuition and State Financial Aid on Public College Enrollment. Review of Higher Education. 23(1): 65-89 (I)
Perna, L.W., & Titus, M. A. (2004). Understanding differences in the choice of college attended: The role of state public policies. Review of Higher Education. 27(4), 501- 525. (I)
Meeting Six: 5/8
High school preparation: Policy and preparation programs
Guest Speaker: Upward Bound Director, Christine Solari
Readings discussed this week:
Adelman, C. 1999. Answers in the Tool Box: Academic Intensity, Attendance Patterns, and Bachelor's Degree Attainment. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education. (pp. v - xi, 82-87) (BB)
Tierney, W. G. (2002). Parents and families in precollege preparation: The lack of connection between research and practice. Educational Policy, 16, 588-606. (I)
Swail, Watson Scott and Laura Perna. 2002. Pre-College Outreach Programs: A National Perspective. In W. G. Tierney and L. S. Hagedorn (Eds.), Increasing Access to College: Extending Possibilities for All Students (pp.15-34). Albany, NY: State University of New York Press. (BB)
Michael W. Kirst. 2003. Improving Preparation for Non-Selective Postsecondary Education: Assessment and Accountability Issues. (BB)
Meeting Seven: 5/15
The impact of policy: Affirmative action and other admissions policies
Guest Speaker: Marcela Muñiz, former Assistant Dean of Undergraduate Admissions, Stanford
Readings discussed this week:
Kane, T.J. 1998. Racial and ethnic preferences in college admissions. In C. Jencks and M. Phillips (eds.), The Black-White test score gap. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press (431-456). (BB)
Hurtado, S. & Navia, C. 1997. Reconciling college access and the affirmative action debate. In Mildred Garcia (ed.) Affirmative action's testament of hope: Strategies for a new era. Albany, NY: SUNY Press. (BB)
Avery, C., Fairbanks, A., and Zeckhauser, R. 2003. The early admissions game: Joining the elite. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press (1-40).
Tienda, Marta, Kalena Cortes, and Sunny Niu. College Attendance and the Texas Top 10 Percent Law: Permanent Contagion or Transitory Promise? Unpublished manuscript, Princeton University, 2003, (accessed July 23, 2004).
(BB)
Meeting Eight: 5/22
School context: High schools and community colleges
Readings discussed this week:
Patricia McDonough. 1999. Choosing Colleges. How Social Class and Schools Structure Opportunity. Albany: SUNY Press. (chapters 3 & 4)
Antonio, A.L., and Horvat, E.M. 2002. Developing the Hadley Taste for College:Organizational Habitus and Aspirations for Elite College Attendance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Sacramento, CA.(BB)
Nora, A. (1993). Two-year colleges and minority students' educational aspirations: Help or hindrance?
In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research (Vol. 9). New York: Agathon Press. (BB) Lee,V. and Ekstrom, R. 1987. "Student Access to Guidance Counseling in High Schools." American Educational Research Journal, 24: 287-310. (I)
Meeting Nine: 5/29
K-16 Policy Coordination/Class wrap-up
Readings discussed this week:
Michael W. Kirst & Andrea Venezia. 2001. Bridging the Great Divide Between Secondary Schools and Postsecondary Education. Phi Delta Kappan magazine, September 2001, number 83, volume 1. (BB)
Haycock, Kati. 1998. School-College Partnerships. In P. Timpane and L. White (eds.), Higher Education and School Reform. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (BB)
Kirst, Michael W. 2003. Using a K-12 Assessment for College Placement. The case of California State University (BB)
Meta- Reflection
Doug Gilbert
Educ 116
Cotterman, Mitchell, Hayakawa
June 7, 2008
Course Re-Design Meta Reflection
The course re-design project was an opportunity to infuse the principles, theories, and reflection from our class into a college classroom experience. By examining an existing course, in my case a Stanford course on post secondary college access and policy issues, I was able to identify an opportunity where service-learning could positively impact Stanford students as well as the local community. While altering the original course, I aimed to incorporate important concepts from our class that included, but were not limited to, critical service learning & pedagogy, best practices, partnerships, reflection and reciprocity, and preparation. The process of re-designing the class represents a crucial element of reflection on service-learning opportunities at the college level.
Critical Service Learning and Pedagogy
When re-examining the course, I was aware that issues of identity and power needed to be addressed. I did this by incorporating specific language regarding the class dynamic. It was important that the professors and students would be working in a collaborative environment. I included the following statement in regards to classroom philosophy, “Learning occurs through self-critique, peer critique, and the sharing of ideas and points of view.” In this way I hoped that students could examine their own issues concerning identity and power while supporting their classmates as they did the same.
Another important aspect that I took into consideration was the necessity of the students to understand relationships within community organizations. A common mistake for college students is to enter into service-learning relationships with attitudes of superiority. I decided to include focused training in the class because I wanted to make sure students were prepared to experience and address power issues of race, class, and age that may occur in this type of environment. Students need to “comprehend that race still matters in shaping the reality for societal institutions, including schools (Phillipsen, 2003, p. 4).” I also included the Zimmer reading early in the class to help students gain insight on this issue. Zimmer examines these issues quite wonderfully in his work entitled The Art of Knowing your Place: White Service Learning Leaders and Urban Community Organizations. By using first hand accounts of his experiences in Los Angeles working with Latino populations and co-workers, he shows how to step-back and defer to his local colleagues when faced with culturally sensitive situations.
While working on this project, I tried to inject the lessons I learned in class concerning critical pedagogy, engaged pedagogy, and social justice education. I believe the adjustments I made utilized these philosophies by incorporating readings such as Freire’s, but also in focusing on Wade’s essential elements of educating for social justice. Wade asks for educational experiences to be student centered, collaborative, experiential, intellectual, analytical, multicultural, value-based, and activist (Wade, 2001 ). The use of service learning as a tool to better understand college access issues addresses most of these points in the readings, reflections, and class activities. I have been careful when addressing value-based questions, to allow students to formulate their own opinions rather than the opinions of the instructor as many classes aim to do.
Best Practices
In re-organizing this class it was important to utilize the best practices that make up service-learning courses. I started by making sure that dialogue and reflection were a cornerstone of the course. Florence claims “Dialogue is central to a transformative pedagogy. Dialogue not only enables the deconstruction of teachers’ image as privileged source of information, but also empowers students, creating space for reconstruction of “knowledge” and the learning process (Florence, 1998, p. 110).” As a result, students are able to create dialogue on-line in their blackboard postings, during class discussions, and in their personal reflections that they can volunteer during class time. This dialogue engages the classroom while pushing the students to get more out of the class as well as their service-learning experience.
Ideological influences and theories are integral to making this service-learning class work. The professor must be familiar with some basic service-learning principles and “offer theory, history, discipline-specific research, and avenues to access local community knowledge to set the context within which participants understand their activity (Koliba, O'Meara, & Seidel, 2000, p. 28).” As a result of the knowledge gained by the introduction of these ideologies, participants can respect the humanity of others and encourage all participants to recognize their responsibilities to each other (Koliba, O'Meara, & Seidel, 2000).