Advanced Educational Psychology

Return to Terri's Home Page

Advanced Educational Psychology

ED 421, 3 credits, call# 11857

Fall 2004

Tuesdays 5:00-8:00, EPASW 2419

Instructor: Dr. Theresa A. Thorkildsen

Office: EPASW 3549 Phone: 312.996.8138

Hours: Before class and by appointment

E-mail: thork@uic.edu (The most reliable method for out-of-class communication)

Web site: http://www.tigger.uic.edu/~thork/fair

Purpose

This course will introduce students to a variety of issues that affect academic performance. Readings are organized around the traditional categories of learning, identity development, motivation, discipline, and assessment. For each of these categories, students will read about different theoretical approaches to articulate and defend a personal theory of learning and teaching.

Readings

There are two required textbooks for this course and a set of assigned articles. A copy fee of $25.00 will be charged for handouts. The assigned books are:

Bjorklund, D. F. (2005). Children’s thinking: Cognitive development and individual differences (4^th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Thorkildsen, T. A., & Nicholls, J. G. (with Bates, A., Brankis, N., & DeBolt, T.). (2002). Motivation and the struggle to learn: Responding to fractured experience. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Course Expectations

The course has many agendas aside from simply learning the ideas represented in the readings and lectures. The activities planned for the course are intended to simulate those you may be expected to participate in while teaching. Successful students will remain conscious of the following expectations.

Read and reflect on new ideas each week. This class relies heavily on weekly discussion of the readings. The most important assignment, therefore, is to read each week’s assignments before coming to class and prepare to use the ideas when participating in class. Although I do not take formal attendance, the course is structured to maximize learning and everyone’s absence is felt. Excessive absences (e.g., more than two classes) have made it impossible for students in past semesters to follow what is going on when they do attend, and typically leads to normatively low grades.

Participate in class discussions and activities. Students will be expected to participate in small group activities, large class discussions, and at least one presentation over the course of the semester. Grades will focus on individual accomplishment, but teamwork is essential in teaching and we will practice many of the collaboration skills needed in schools. As many educators quickly learn, “many hands make light work.”

Be a respectful citizen when collaborating with your peers. We will negotiate a strategy for forming small work groups that will complete activities in class. In the past, students have differed in whether they prefer to work in groups structured like small curricular departments (e.g., preschool, elementary, secondary, college) or whether they prefer to change group members every couple weeks. Long-term connections are often made in these courses when students collaborate in stable groups, but short-term connections are also intellectually interesting. Groups will be successful if they are able to complete assigned tasks, generate ideas for using theoretical ideas in the classroom, and collaborate in the production of a presentation to the class as a whole.

Discover more uses for technology. Each student will be expected to learn something new about technology. Rather than require a “technology course” we have decided to expect students to learn as they go—the same way most educators learn about the latest tools of the trade. UIC is now requiring most students to have access to the Internet and preferably to own some kind of computer. The syllabus will be posted on the Web and readings and discussion questions will be added as the course progresses. A class listserv will be maintained in which students can post announcements, ask general questions, and share resources. Small groups will be asked to communicate via e-mail about particular activities and each student will be asked to find at least one outside reading from a professional journal in their field. Students will also participate in a group presentation that includes the use of some form of technology.

Complete any certification-related tasks. All certification students are now being asked to learn TaskStream, a program for designing and tracking lesson planning, course syllabi, and other features of a teaching portfolio. This course will not be heavily dependent on that program, but students will be asked to complete at least one survey online. Part of one class session will be devoted to informing students of training sessions and other TaskStream goals set by the Council on Teacher Education.

Assignments

Instead of tests, students will be asked to complete a variety of individual writing activities as well as those associated with group work. All assignments will use a take-home format so that the final product may be typed using some sort of word processing program. Students may turn in assignments as attachments on e-mail, but should use Word for PCs if they plan to do so. The Educational Technology Lab on the 2^nd floor of EPASW is available for translating documents and ensuring that all students have access to computers. During peak times, hackers are very busy and it will be important to maintain communication about when assignments are turned in and received.

Each student will find it useful to keep a personal notebook containing all their assignments until they have completed the entire teacher certification program. There are many essays and application forms to complete, all of which involve some use of material we will cover this semester. Completing all course assignments to the best of your ability can save time later in the program.

Group tasks (25% of the final grade). Although I will not collect group tasks each week, there will be occasional stock-taking assignments and tasks that groups will turn in. These will involve assessments of the process of group work as well as the products of your discussions.

Initial reflection paper (15% of final grade). By the third week of the semester, students will be asked to turn in a short summary of their future goals as a teacher, experience in schools, and observations about the age group and context in which they hope to teach.

Midterm (30% of the final grade). This structured writing task will require a stock-taking of the ideas covered in the readings and an attempt to imagine how they might be used in teaching. Each student will be asked to visualize him or herself as an instructor and to evaluate which theories of learning and motivation will best meet the needs of their future students.

Final project (30% of the final grade). Students will be asked to complete a two part final project in which they design a learning environment, including classroom management and assessment strategies, to facilitate learning among the students they hope to teach. A written portion of this project will be completed individually and will involve answers to a set of guiding questions. A presentation portion of this project will involve collaborating with other class members in either providing a demonstration of planned activities (asking classmates to role play students in the appropriate age group) or in otherwise finding a way to help everyone see the best features of the planned classroom structure.

Accessibility

UIC strives to ensure the accessibility of programs, classes, and services to students with disabilities. Reasonable accommodations can be arranged for students with various types of disabilities, such as documented learning disabilities, vision or hearing impairments, and emotional or physical disabilities. Students who need accommodations for this class should let the instructor know their needs and she will help them obtain assistance.

Tentative Schedule

Week	Topic	Readings
Aug. 24^th	Jigsaw learning	Pedersen, Faucher, & Eaton See week 2
Aug. 31^st	Dilemmas of teaching *Special Training—essential for everyone*	Colsant Thorkildsen & Jordan Discussion questions
Sept. 7^th	What is learning?	Bjorklund Discussion questions *First Assignment Due*
Sept. 14^th	Deep and superficial learning	Bjorklund Discussion questions
Sept. 21^st	Age-specific issues in learning	Bjorklund Discussion questions
Sept. 28^th	Addressing students’ needs	Thorkildsen & Nicholls Weiner Graham Discussion questions
Oct. 5^th	Facilitating choice, self-determination, or autonomy	Thorkildsen & Nicholls Deci& Ryan Grolnick & Ryan Ryan & Deci Discussion questions
Oct. 12^th	Balancing freedom and structure	Thorkildsen & Nicholls Ford, et al. Jagacinski & Nicholls Schunk Discussion questions
Oct. 19^th	Myths and classroom management	Beyer Gathercoal Catt *Mid-term exams due*
Oct. 26^th	Issues of control and choice	Collins Lewis McNeil Henry & Abowitz Discussion questions
Nov. 2^nd	Learning and assessment	Green Maxwell Paris & Paris Taylor & Nolen
Nov. 9^th	Coordinating philosophy, psychology, and educational practices	Kohlberg & Mayer Discussion questions *Final exam available* Teaching dilemmas
Nov. 16^th	Group presentations
Nov. 23^rd	Thanksgiving Week	*No class*
Nov. 30^th	Group presentations
Dec. 7^th	Group presentations (if necessary)	*Final exams due*

Readings

Week 1: Jigsaw learning

Pedersen, E., Faucher, T. A., & Eaton, W. W. (1978). A new perspective on the effects of first grade teachers on children’s subsequent adult status. Harvard Educational Review, 48, 1-31.

Complete readings for Week 2

Week 2: Developing a sense of the dilemmas of teaching in urban contexts

Colsant, L. (1995). “Hey man, why do we gotta take this…?” Learning to listen to students. In J. G. Nicholls & T. A. Thorkildsen (Eds.), Reasons for learning: Expanding the conversation on student-teacher collaboration (pp. 62-89). New York: Teachers College Press.

Thorkildsen, T. A., & Jordan, C. (1995). Is there a right way to collaborate? When the experts speak, can the customers be right? In J. G. Nicholls & T. A. Thorkildsen (Eds.), Reasons for learning: Expanding the conversation on student-teacher collaboration (pp. 137-161). New York: Teachers College Press.

Week 3: What is learning?

Bjorklund, D. F. (2005). Children’s thinking: Cognitive development and individual differences (4^th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

An introduction to cognitive development

Biological bases of cognitive development

The social construction of mind: Sociocultural perspectives on cognitive development

Cognitive development: What changes and how?

Week 4: Deep and superficial learning

Bjorklund, D. F. (2005). Children’s thinking: Cognitive development and individual differences (4^th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Piaget and the neo-Piagetians

Information-Processing Approaches

Learning to think on their own: the role of strategies in cognitive development

Week 5: Age-specific issues in learning

Bjorklund, D. F. (2005). Children’s thinking: Cognitive development and individual differences (4^th ed.). Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.

Week 6: Addressing students’ needs

Thorkildsen, T. A., & Nicholls, J. G. (with Bates, A., Brankis, N., & DeBolt, T.). (2002). Motivation and the struggle to learn: Responding to fractured experience. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Learning from lives in progress

Coordinating needs and expectations

Little boy on the defensive

Weiner, B. (1979). A theory of motivation for some classroom experiences. Journal of Educational Psychology, 71, 3-25.

Graham, S. (2004). The role of perceived responsibility in nurturing morality. In T. A. Thorkildsen & H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Nurturing morality (pp. 19-36). New York: Kluwer Academic.

Week 7: Facilitating choice, self-determination, or autonomy

Thorkildsen, T. A., & Nicholls, J. G. (with Bates, A., Brankis, N., & DeBolt, T.). (2002). Motivation and the struggle to learn: Responding to fractured experience. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Quiet Bird

Deci, E. L., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). The support of autonomy and the control of behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 1024-1037.

Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in children’s learning: An experimental and individual differences investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 890-898.

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Intrinsic and extrinsic motivations: Classic definitions and new directions. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 25, 54-67.

Week 8: Balancing freedom and structure

Thorkildsen, T. A., & Nicholls, J. G. (with Bates, A., Brankis, N., & DeBolt, T.). (2002). Motivation and the struggle to learn: Responding to fractured experience. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Enlightened egocentism

A fighting spirit

Ford, J. K., Smith, E. M., Weissbein, D. A., Gully, S. M., & Salas, E. (1998). Relationships of goal orientation, metacognitive activity, and practice strategies with learning outcomes and transfer. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 218-233.

Jagacinski, C. M., & Nicholls, J. G. (1990). Reducing effort to protect perceived ability: “They’d do it but I wouldn’t.” Journal of Educational Psychology, 82, 15-21.

Schunk, D. H. (1982). Effects of effort attributional feedback on children’s perceived self-efficacy and achievement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 74, 548-556.

Schunk, D. H., & Cox, P. D. (1986). Strategy training and attributional feedback with learning disabled students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 78, 201-209.

Week 9: Myths and classroom management

Beyer, L. (1998). “Uncontrolled students eventually become unmanageable”: The politics of classroom discipline. In R. E. Butchart & B. McEwan (Eds.), Classroom discipline in American schools: Problems and possibilities for democratic education (pp. 51-84). New York: SUNY Press.

Catt, R. (2003). Drugs and bad language: A view from the secondary classroom. International Journal of Adolescence and Youth, 11, 59-70.

Emmer, E. T., & Stough, L. M. (2001). Classroom management: A critical part of educational psychology, with implications for teacher education. Educational Psychologist, 36, 103-112.

Gathercoal, F. (1998). Judicious discipline. In R. E. Butchart & B. McEwan (Eds.), Classroom discipline in American schools: Problems and possibilities for democratic education (pp. 197-216). New York: SUNY Press.

Week 10: Issues of control and choice

Collins, J. (2000). Are you talking to me? The need to respect and develop a pupil’s self-image. Educational Research, 42, 157-166.

Henry, S. E., & Abowitz, K. K. (1998). Interpreting Glasser’s Control Theory: Problems that emerge from innate needs and predetermined ends. In R. E. Butchart & B. McEwan (Eds.), Classroom discipline in American schools: Problems and possibilities for democratic education (pp. 157-196). New York: SUNY Press.

Lewis, R. (2001). Classroom discipline and student responsibility: The students’ view. Teaching and Teacher Education, 17, 307-319.

McNeil, L. S. (1986). Control and resistance. In L. S. McNeil, Contradictions of control: School structure and school knowledge (pp. 155-216). New York: Routledge.

Week 11: Fundamentals of assessment

Green, B.F. (1981). A primer of testing. American Psychologist, 36, 1001-1011.

Maxwell, W. (1965). The kingdom where straightforward, logical thinking was admired over every other kind. In W. Maxwell, All the days and nights (pp. 397-403). New York: Vintage International.

Paris, S. G., & Paris, A. H. (2001). Classroom applications of research on self-regulated learning. Educational Psychologist, 36, 89-101.

Taylor, C. S., & Nolen, S. B. (2005). Introduction to assessment. In C. S. Taylor & S. B. Nolen, Classroom assessment: Supporting teaching and learning in real classrooms (pp.1-25). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Week 12: Coordinating philosophy, psychology, and educational practices

Kohlberg, L., & Mayer, R. (1972). Development as the aim of education. Harvard Educational Review, 42, 449-496.

Weeks 13-16: Group presentations

Return to Terri's Home Page