University of Massachusetts at Boston
Graduate College of Education
Critical & Creative Thinking Program
Seminar on

Evaluation of Educational Change

CrCrTh693
Spring 2002

Syllabus

(See also Revised version reflecting the experience of the semester)
Instructor: Peter Taylor, Critical & Creative Thinking Program
Email: peter.taylor@umb.edu
Phone: 617-287-7636
Office: Wheatley 2nd flr 143.09 (near Counseling & School Psychology)
Class: M 4-6.30, McC 2-628-S
Office/phone call hours: M, Th 2-3.30
Email office hours: M & Th 7.30-9am
Course Website: http://www.faculty.umb.edu/peter_taylor/693-02.html
General email: Emails sent to cct693@umbmap.cc.umb.edu go to everyone in the course.
E-clippings: Clippings from the internet sent to cct693clips@yahoogroups.com will be archived for all to read at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/cct693clips
CATALOG DESCRIPTION
This course covers techniques for and critical thinking about the evaluation of changes in educational practices and policies in schools, organizations, and informal contexts. Topics include quantitative and qualitative methods for design and analysis, participatory design of practices and policies, institutional learning, the wider reception or discounting of evaluations, and selected case studies, including those arising from semester-long student projects.

COURSE DESCRIPTION for Spring 2002
Theme: Facilitation and Evaluation towards Educational Change
In this course educational change is construed broadly to include organizational change, training, and personal development, as well as curricular and school change. One side of the course explores an Action Research approach to formulating possible educational innovations and building a constituency for them. Activities introduce tools for group facilitation, participatory planning, and reflective practice. Whereas the exploratory side of the course "opens up and out," the other side of the course "focuses in" on tight evaluations, that is, on a) demonstrating the effectiveness of specific changes in educational practices and policies in schools, organizations, and informal contexts (so as to help promote changes); and b) identifying needs in such settings (so as to design the changes proposed). These two sides of course and the tension between the them are further explored through student projects and case studies that also highlight the wider political reception or discounting of evaluations and educational change initiatives.
PREREQUISITES: CrCrTh601 and 602, or permission of instructor.
For CCT students, this course is best taken in your third last semester (before the Practicum and Synthesis).

ACCOMMODATIONS: Sections 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 offer guidelines for curriculum modifications and adaptations for students with documented disabilities. If applicable, students may obtain adaptation recommendations from the Ross Center (287-7430). The student must present these recommendations to each professor within a reasonable period, preferably by the end of the Drop/Add period.

Students are advised to retain a copy of this syllabus in personal files for use when applying for certification, licensure, or transfer credit.
This syllabus is subject to change, but workload expectations will not be increased after the semester starts. (Version 26 January 02)

SECTIONS TO FOLLOW IN SYLLABUS

(See notes on how to read syllabus)
Additional material linked to the course website includes:Handouts, some non-copyrighted Readings, and other Resources.

TEXTS

Recommended: Calhoun, E. F. (1994). How to Use Action Research in the Self-Renewing School. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
A set of readings are available on reserve for personal photocopying.
Books and additional readings in the bibliography are available on reserve. (Arrange time in your schedule to read or photocopy relevant selections in the Healey Library.)
Throughout this syllabus attributes of the Thoughtful and Responsive Educator are indicated in brackets:

ASSESSMENT & REQUIREMENTS

More detail about the assignments, expectations, and rationale is provided in the Teaching/Learning Tools and Rubrics sections of the syllabus.

Written assignments and presentations, 2/3 of grade [cL, uP, uA, uT, pCo, pR, pJ]
A. Action Research assignments (four) and Evaluation Clock assignment (one).
B. Project: Design EITHER an evaluation of a change or intervention in a specific classroom, workplace or personal teaching/learning practice, an educational policy, an educational institution, or a social policy OR your facilitation of a reflective and/or collaborative process to shape such a change or intervention. A sequence of 5 assignments is required--initial description, notes on research and planning, work-in-progress presentation, complete draft report, and final (1500-2500 words) report.

Participation and contribution to the class process, 1/3 of grade.
C. Prepared participation and attendance at class meetings (=13 items) [pCo]
D. Personal/Professional Development (PD) Workbook submitted for perusal week 7 & at the end of the semester (=2 items) [cL, uC, uP, pR]
E. Minimum of two in-office or phone conferences on your assignments and project, before weeks 6 and 10 (=2 items) [cM]
F. Peer commentary on another student's draft report (with copy submitted to PT or included in PD workbook) [pCo]
G. Assignment Check-list maintained by student and submitted week 12 [uA]
H. Process Review on the development of your work, included with your PD Workbook at end-of-semester perusal [cL, pR]

SCHEDULE OF CLASSES


Narrative: A quick overview of the course is provided in week 1, but it is assumed that this will make most sense if you directly experience the issues raised. So from week 2 you are thrown right into a month-long unit in which you explore what Action Research entails by working on student-defined problems arising from a issue in organizational/educational change. Each week also introduces an other approach to group facilitation.

Class 1 (1/28) Introductions
--to each other, our experiences and concerns in education (broadly construed), including Gallery walk
--to the overall schema underlying the course [pCo, pR]
--to the general experience of the course, through interviewing an alum (tentative) [cM]
--to Action Research, including video segment on Myles Horton and the Highlander Center
[cD, pC, pCo, pJ]
--to the two possible areas for the Action Research sessions: "Enhancing diversity in and through the CCT Program," or "Shaping CCT's future in a time of growing constraints"
--to formative evaluation, through an end-of-class Critical Incident Questionnaire [uA]

Homework tasks include: review the syllabus and overview, get set-up to use the internet and computers, peruse vision charts and evaluations from previous semesters, begin your PD workbook, sign up for first conference, etc. (see handout). [cL, uT, pR]

Class 2 (2/4) Action Research Session 1
Reading: Greenwald, "Learning from Problems."
Feedback on Critical Incident Questionnaire [cM, uA]
Questions on Syllabus and course mechanics
From ill-defined case to establishing problem-oriented sub-groups and tasks for the week ahead, including Freewriting and brainstorming on the different tasks that might be involved in this endeavor. (worksheet) [uT, pCo, pR, pJ]
Additional reading: Greenwald, Science in Progress

Class 3 (2/11) Action Research Session 2
Introduction to Co-operative Group work, including discussion of video and modeling of small group activity (procedures) [pCo]
Small group work reviewing tasks undertaken, reformulating direction, defining tasks and check-in for the two weeks ahead, and making preliminary verbal reports to the whole class. (small group activity)
[uT, pCo, pR, pJ]
Post-class readings: Notes on facilitating collaboration (handout)

2/18 No class (Presidents' Day)
*A* Asmt. 1: Email PT by 2/19 a 250-500 word report on tasks assigned to you and how they contribute to the progress your Action Research team has made.

Class 4 (2/25) Action Research Session 3
Pre- or post-class reading on Focused Conversations: Stanfield, 6-29.
Focused Conversation on Action Research experience to date (handout) [uA, pCo, pR]
Small group work reviewing tasks undertaken, planning presentations, and defining tasks remaining
(handout) [uT, pCo, pR, pJ]

Class 5 (3/4) Presentations by Action Research teams
Presentation to peers and guest panel (invited by AR teams) [uT, pCo, pR, pJ]
*A* Asmts. 2 & 3: Oral presentation and Draft written report from each team. Either a) use initials to indicate the different contributions within the team, or b) combine separate contributions under a cover sheet that explains their combined message.
(Guide to feedback) Post-class reading: To reflect on your experience, start early on reading for class 7 (and complete homework task 5.4)
(PT's overall response to AR reports)

Narrative: You can now examine what others have written in light of your own Action Research experience. While you are doing this (in preparation for class 7 & asmt. 5), we shift to the focusing in side of the course through the tool/discipline of the evaluation clock.

Class 6 (3/11) Formulating informative comparisons as a basis for evaluations
Reading: Introductory/overview sections from either Patton, Weiss, Stark, or precis of Patton or Weiss until you get a feel for the contrast between Action Research and evaluation.
(See also preparatory homework tasks 5.1-5.3)
Introduction to statistical formulations of comparisons and background assumptions [uC]
Comparison steps (2-4) in the < a href="evalclock.doc">evaluation clock, used to analyze a clipping on the effects of a smoking ban
Post-class reading: [not distributed] PT's precis of Pietro, Evaluation Sourcebook, p. 22-23 (on evaluation clock) and p. 12-17, & 21 (to provide context) (handout)

*A* First conference mut be completed by 3/11 to discuss Action Research experience and the course thus far
*A* Schedule second conference before 4/22 to discuss your projects and use of evaluation clock

3/18 No class (Spring break)
*A* Asmt. 4a due 3/19 by email (or by mail to 41 Cornell St., Arlington, MA 02474). Use the comparison steps (2-4) in the evaluation clock to analyze a clipping on an evaluation or related study (chosen during class, handout)

Class 7 (3/25) Comparing your Experience as Novice Action Researchers with the Considered Formulations in the Texts
Reading: Selection from Calhoun, How to Use Action Research, Hitchcock & Hughes, Chap. 3, "Access, ethics, and objectivity," Greenwood & Levin, Chaps. 8 & 11, "Action research cases," & "Action science and organizational learning," Rokovich, et al., "Implementing change," Jenkins, "Action learning: Taking the time it takes," CEDAC, Our Economy
Extra reading on study of CIT
Small group discussions and reports back to the class [uC, pCo]
Guest Panel of school change action researchers [cM]
Critical Incident Questionnaire on course to date [uA, pR]
*A* PD workbooks collected for perusal; returned week 8.
*A* Amst. 5 due: Reflection paper (500-1000 words) relating your Action Research experience to points made by at least one of the readings for class 7.

Narrative: In order to complete a satisfying course project you need to focus on something tight and do-able, but Strategic Personal Planning allows you to find this focus by first opening out and acknowledging a wide range of factors and wishes that your work could (should?) take into account. Strategic Personal Planning provides a glimpse of Strategic Participatory Planning, which can be used to facilitate group endeavors.

Class 8 (4/1) Strategic Participatory Planning, applied to personal course and life projects
Reading: Weissglass, "Constructivist Listening," Spencer, chaps. 5 & 7; also Review Project reports from previous semesters (on reserve).
Feedback on Critical Incident Questionnaire [cM, uA]
Supportive Listening (a variant of constructivist listening) on one's hopes/fears re: educational change
[pC, pR]
Strategic personal planning workshop (about the educational change you want to facilitate/promote)
(handout) [cL, uA, pR]
In-class drafting of initial project description (carbon copy submitted to PT)
Post-class reading: Materials on Strategic Participatory Planning from ICA Facilitators Manual, CEDAC, Our Economy
*A* Asmt. 4b due: Full evaluation clock used to analyze the chosen clipping and plan the missing pieces of the study.

Narrative: The combination of Opening out and Focusing in always seems hard for most CCT students and others who take CCT courses, so we take another look at use of the Evaluation Clock and Strategic Personal Planning. Meanwhile and for the weeks ahead you concentrate on development of your own projects and supporting each other to complete them.

Class 9 (4/8) More on Evaluation Clock and Strategic Personal Planning
Peer coaching on Evaluation clock assignment and its extension to students' projects
Additional readings: More from Patton, Weiss, Stark, or precis of Patton or Weiss

4/15 No class (Patriots' Day)
*A* Asmt due by email or mail: Revised initial Project Description
Reading: Hitchcock & Hughes, Chapter 5, Designing, planning and evaluating research.

Class 10 (4/22) Work-in-progress Presentations on Student Projects I
Work-in-progress Presentations and peer/instructor evaluations [uC, uA, pCo]
*A* Asmt due: Notes on Research and Planning for Individual Student Projects
*A* Asmt due: Work-in-progress Presentation on Project (or next week)

Class 11 (4/29) Work-in-progress Presentations on Student Projects II
Work-in-progress Presentations and peer/instructor evaluations [uC, uA, pCo]
*A* Asmt due: Work-in-progress Presentation on Project (or last week)

Narrative: Although it is not expected that your projects tackle the larger political context of making changes in education or draw on sophisticated theories about evaluation and educational change, the next class serves to put these areas on your maps. The final class takes stock of the knowledge and experiences you have gained from the course, and looks towards your future research and engagement around educational change.

Class 12 (5/6) Politics and Theories of Evaluation and Educational Research
[handout on preparation]
Readings--select one from:
a. Case studies of Woodhead, "When psychology," Hunt, "The dilemma," Metcalf, "Reading between the lines."
b. Action Research as an alternative to Positivist and Interpretivist approaches: Carr & Kemmis, Becoming Critical, CEDAC, Our Economy, Greenwood, "Action science and organizational learning," Taylor, "Whose trees," & "Constructing heterogeneous webs"
"Jig-saw" discussion of readings [uC, pCo]
Video segment on Myles Horton and the Highlander Center, a longterm source of Participatory Action Research [cE, cD, cM, pC, pCo, pJ]
Historical/Future Scan of Educatioal change in its wider world context [pCo, pR]
Additional reading: McLeod, et al., "Changing how we work," Senge et al., "Fostering communities"
*A* Assignment Check-list maintained by student, with incomplete contract if needed
*A* Asmt due: Complete Draft of Design Project (2 copies and by email attachment or on disk)
*A* Make comments on another student's draft, and email them to the person by 5/11.

Class 13 (5/13) Taking stock of course & of change: Where have we come & where do we go from here?
Reading: Cashin, "Student ratings of teaching"
Cardstorming on Personal & Professional Development in Educational Change & Evaluation [cL, cD, uA]
Discussion of variety of possible course evaluations and goals [uA]
GCOE & CCT course evaluations (see previous semesters' evaluations)
Additional reading: Stanfield, Courage to Learn (selections TBA)

Due 5/20 before 5pm
*A* PD workbook for perusal, to be picked up after 5/27 from Department of Curriculum & Instruction office, W-2-093
*A* Final Project report and Process Review

KEY TEACHING/LEARNING TOOLS

including guidelines for assignments
Examples of previous students' work will be distributed from time to time if further guidance is needed.
Refer to the Rubrics section for a check-list of expectations for the assignments and other requirements.

Written assignments and presentations
Note: If you get behind, ask for an extension or skip the assignment/item--the intended learning rarely happens if you submit a stack of late work.
A. Action Research assignments [cL, uP, uA, pCo, pR, pJ]
The expectation for these assignments is that you will pull together the work you have done for your Action Research team and reflect on the experience in ways that fit your group's focus, the tasks you take on, and your own style. Moreover, provided you submit the assignment on time, my responses will be designed to help you develop your contribution to the AR still remaining.
Evaluation clock [uA, pCo, pR]
The expectation for this assignment is that you will not get it right the first time, but will need coaching to produce the focused comparson steps and the recursive full clock.
B. Stages of development for course project [cM, uA, uT]
The course project should not be seen as a "term paper," but as a process of development that involves dialogue with the instructor and other students and revision (re-seeing) in light of that dialogue. To facilitate that process, a sequence of five assignments and peer commentary is required. The goals of each stage are described below.
Initial description
Building on your in-class draft and comments back from me, compose an initial overview of your project. This overview may, several revisions later, end up setting the scene in the introduction of your project. In one-two prose paragraphs (not disconnected points aka "bullets"), an overview should convey subject, audience, and your reason for working on this project. The subject must relate to evaluation and/or facilitation of educational change (broadly construed) that you are doing or iterested in undertaking. Previous semesters' projects are available for viewing on reserve.
Notes on research and planning [uT]
Pull together notes on your reading and your thinking and present it in a form organized so it can elicit useful comments from a reader (in this case, me). To show your planning, you should submit an updated overview and an outline and/or evaluation clock. To show that you are finding out what others have been doing in your area of interest, you should include annotated bibliography of readings done or planned. Record the full citations for your sources, including those from the WWW. I recommend using a bibliographic database--Endnote can be downloaded for a 30 day trial from http://www.endnote.com
Work-in-progress presentation [pCo]
Preparing presentations, hearing yourself deliver them, and getting feedback usually leads to self-clarification of the overall direction of your project and of your priorities for further work. In this spirit, 15 minute presentations of your work-in-progress are scheduled early in your projects and are necessarily on work-in-progress. Convey the important features of work you have already done and, to elicit useful feedback during 3-5 minutes of Q&A, indicate also where additional investigation or advice are needed and where you think that might lead you.
Complete draft report
See guidelines for final report. The draft must get to the end to count, even if some sections along the way are only sketches.
Final report (1500-2500 words, plus bibliography of references cited)
Whatever form your report takes, it should Grab readers' attention, Orient them, and move through Steps so that they appreciate the Position you have led them to and how it matches the subject of your project. You should also include material that conveys your process of development during the semester and in the future. The report should not be directed to the instructor, but conceived as something helpful to your CCT student colleagues.
For the report to be counted as final, you must have revised in response to comments from instructor and peers on complete draft. Allow time for the additional investigation and thinking that may be entailed.

A & B, Dialogue around written work [cM, uA, pR]
I try to create a dialogue with each student around written work, that is, around your writing, my responses, and your responses in turn. Central to this teaching/learning interaction are requests to "Revise and Resubmit." The idea is not that you make changes to please me the teacher or to meet some unstated standard, but that as a writer you use the eye of others to develop your own thinking and make it work better on readers. I may continue to request revision when I judge that the interaction can still yield significant learning--such a request does not mean your (re)submission was "bad." Even when a first submissions of a written assignment is excellent, angles for learning through dialogue are always opened up.

In my comments I try to capture where the writer was taking me and make suggestions for how to clarify and extend the impact on readers of what was written. After letting my comments sink in, you may conclude that I have missed the point. In this case, my misreading should stimulate you to revise so as to help readers avoid mistaking the intended point. If you do not understand the directions I saw in your work or those I suggest for the revision, a face-to-face or phone conversation is the obvious next step--written comments have definite limitations when writers and readers want to appreciate and learn from what each other is saying and thinking. Please talk to me immediately if you do not see how you are benefitting from the "Revise and resubmit" process. I am still learning how to engage students in this in ways that take into account your various backgrounds and dispositions and my own (see research report on dialogue around written work).

Students should submit two copies of all typed assignments because I keep one plus a carbon copy of my comments to refer back to.

C. Prepared participation and punctual attendance at class meetings is expected, but allowance is made for other priorities in your life. I do not require you to give excuses for absence, lateness, or lack of preparation. Simply make up the 80% of participation items in other ways (D-H).

D. Personal/Professional Development Workbook [cL, cD, pCo, pR]
In your workbook keep records or products of homework and Action Research tasks, preparation for assignments, weekly journal-type reflections on the course and classes, notes on readings, clippings, e-clippings. Explore, when appropriate, the relationship between, on one hand, your interests and possible projects and, on the other hand, the readings and activities. I encourage those of you who find it hard to make space for journalling/reflection to stay 10 minutes after class and write while your thoughts are fresh. If you are using the workbook effectively, it should convey your developing process of preparing to practice the tools and of critical thinking about course readings, activities, and discussions. When you first submit the PD workbook for perusal, I will let you know if you need to show more processing.

PD workbooks will be collected for perusal twice during the semester. Bind together pages with post-its or otherwise indicate which bits you do not want me to look at.

Clippings and E-clippings [cL]
To keep up with current developments--and get you into the habit of this for your lifelong learning-- look for articles related to evaluation and facilitation of educational change in newspapers, magazines, journals, and websites. Richard Rothstein's column in NY Times on Wednesdays is especially good. Write the full citation on each article, unless it is already included. Use large post-its to add your own reflections on specific points in the articles you choose. Aim for one/week. Include these in your PD workbook, including copies of items from the WWW posted to cct693Clips. For clippings you find on the web submit the URL and brief annotation to cct693clips@yahoogroups.com. These can be viewed at http://www.yahoogroups.com/group/cct693Clips. Use the search box to find clippings on specific topics.

E. Conferences [pC]
for discussion of comments on assignments (see Dialogue around written work, above), ideas for course projects, and the course as a whole. They are important to ensure timely resolution of misunderstandings and to get a recharge if you get behind.

F. Peer commentary [pCo]
After the draft report is completed, you should comment on another student's draft. Send me a copy by email and/or include in PD workbook. Keep Elbow, Writing with Power, chapters 3 & 13 in mind when you decide what approaches to commenting you ask for as a writer and use as a commentator. In the past I made lots of specific suggestions for clarification and change in the margins, but in my experience, such suggestions led only a minority of students beyond touching up into re-thinking and revising their ideas and writing. On the other hand, I believe that all writers value comments that reassure them that they have been listened to and their voice, however uncertain, has been heard.

G. Assignment check-list [uA]
Please keep track of your assignments and revisions submitted and when they are returned marked OK/RNR. To gauge whether you are on track for at least a B+, simply note whether you have submitted 80% of the assignments by the dates marked and attended 80% of the classes.

H. Process review [cL, pR]
Identify 4-6 examples that capture the process of development of your work and thinking about facilitation and evaluation of educational change. Journaling, freewriting, drafts, etc. may be included, that is, not simply your best products. Explain your choices in a 250-500 word cover note and through annotations (large post-its are a good way to do this). Submit with your PD workbook, or extract into a portfolio.

Other Teaching/Learning Tools
Rationale for the Assessment system [uA]
The rationale for grading the different assignments simply OK or R&R (revise & resubmit) and granting an automatic B+ for 80% satisfactory completion is to keep the focus of our teaching/learning interactions on your developing through the semester. It allows more space for students and instructor to appreciate and learn from what each other is saying and thinking. My goal is to work with everyone to achieve the 80% satisfactory completion level. Students who progress steadily towards that goal during the semester usually end up producing work that meets the criteria for a higher grade than a B+ (see rubrics). Use the Assignment Check-list to keep track of your own progress. Ask for clarification if needed to get clear and comfortable with this system.

Learning Community and email group/list [cM, pC, pCo]
Individually and as a group, you already know a lot about educational change. You can learn a lot from each other and from teaching others what you know. The email group or list (emails sent to cct693@umbmap.cc.umb.edu) can be used to help the community develop.

Activities for "self-affirming" learning
Students already know a lot. If this knowledge is elicited and affirmed (e.g., through the gallery walk in class 1), they are more able to learn from others. Activities such as freewriting bring to the surface students' insight that they were not able, at first, to acknowledge. Over the course of the semester, students are encouraged to recognize that there is insight in every response and share their not-yet-stable aspects. The trust required takes time to establish.

Tools for Group Process
Each week introduices a different tool or practice for facilitating group process. Handouts on the tools are linked to the course website when they are ready.

Guided freewriting
In a freewriting exercise, you should not take your pen off the paper. Keep writing even if you find yourself stating over and over again, "I don't know what to say." What you write won't be seen by anyone else, so don't go back to tidy up sentences, grammar, spelling. You will probably diverge from the topic, at least for a time while you acknowledge other preoccupations. That's OK--it's one of the purposes of the exercise to get things off one's chest. However, if you keep writing for ten minutes, you should expose some thoughts about the topic that had been below the surface of your attention--that's another of the aims of the exercise. Reference: Elbow, chapter 2.

Think-pair-share
After preparing your thoughts, you pair up with another person, and, through sharing ideas, you refine your own and prepare to share a key part of them with the whole class (time permitting).

Taking stock during semester ("formative evaluation")
Through activities, such as the Critical Incident Questionnaire, I encourage students to approach this course as a work-in-progress. Instead of harboring criticisms to submit after the fact, we can find opportunities to affirm what is working well and suggest directions for further development.
Taking stock at end of semester involves multiple angles on course evaluation (including written evaluations during class, Process reviews and planning for your ongoing PD): [uA]
a) to feed into your future learning (and other work), you take stock of your process(es) over the semester;
b) to feed into my future teaching (and future learning about how students learn), I take stock of how you, the students, have learned.
(see previous semesters' evaluations)

RUBRICS

Overall course grade. This rubric is simple, but unusual. Read the Rationale in the Key Teaching/Learning Tools amd ask questions to make sure you have it clear.

B+ is earned automatically for 80% of Written items (=8 of 10, incl. Final Report) marked OK/RNR (=OK/ Reflection-revision--resubmission Not Requested) and 80% of Participation items fulfilled (=16 of 20).
The qualities below will determine whether a higher grade is earned. For each quality fulfilled very well you get 2 %points or 1 %point if you did an OK job, but there was room for more development/attention. A total of 8-14 %points, gets you an A-; 15+% points, an A.
A sequence of assignments paced more or less as in syllabus,
often revised thoroughly and with new thinking in response to comments. [pR]
Project innovative, well planned and carried out with considerable initiative, and
indicates that you can move from design to implementation in your specific situation. [cM, uC, uP]
Project report clear and well structured,
with supporting references and detail, and professionally presented. [cM]
Active contribution to and reflection on process of learning from Action Research unit
Ability to shift between opening out and focusing in as required to complete full Evaluation clock
Active, prepared participation in classes. [pCo]
Consistent work outside class as evidenced in PD workbook [cL,pR]
Process Review that shows deep reflection on your development through the semester and
maps out the future directions in which you plan to develop [cL,pR]

If you do not reach the B+ level, the grade for Written assignments & presentations will be pro-rated from B+ down to C for 50% of assignments OK/RNR. Similarly the Participation & process grade goes down to C for 50% of participation items.

Converting points to percentages to grades. Count each writing OK/RNR as 10 points up to a maximum of 80 and each participation item as 5 points up to a maximum of 80. Combine these points into a % grade = Writing points x 2/3 + Participation points x 1/3. If your combined total is 80%, the rubric above is used to assign grades of B+, A-, and A. Below 80%, the minimum grade for B is 72.5%; for B- is 65%; for C+ is 57.5%; and for C is 50%.

Written assignments (10 assignment points each up to maximum of 80)
Each assignment will gain 10 points if marked OK/RNR (= Revision-reflection-resubmission Not Requested) meaning you have met almost all of the guidelines described in the section on Key teaching/Learning Tools (and summarized below), but Revision and Resubmission will be requested if you have not (0 points). Rationale for the assignments is conveyed in the Key Teaching/Learning tools section. Comments made as part of Dialogue around written work (see earlier in syllabus) provide guidance tailored to each student's specific interests and needs.

In addition to the specific rubric for each assignment, the following General Expectations apply:
Two copies of all papers must be turned in during class typed on standard 8.5" x 11" paper, using at least 1" margins, a standard 10- or 12-point font such as Times or Helvetica, and (preferably) one and half line spacing. Do not submit work by email unless specifically arranged with the instructor.
The student's name, course number, assignment number, and date of writing or revising must appear on the first page at the top right. Subsequent pages must contain the student's name and the page number. Do not use a cover page.
Proofread your work for spelling, grammar, punctuation, and coherence of paragraphs. (Each paragraph should have one clear topic that is supported and/or developed by what is in it.) If writing
is difficult for you, arrange assistance from a fellow student, the Graduate writing center (S-1-03, 287-5708) or a professional editor -- do not expect the instructor to be your writing teacher.
Recommended:
- as a guide to writing and revising: Elbow, Writing with Power (on reserve)
- as a guide on technical matters of writing scholarly papers: Turabian, A Manual For Writers (in library's reference section).

RUBRICS for SPECIFIC ASSIGNMENTS -- Use these as a check-list after you have digested the guidelines given in the previous section.
A. Action research assignments and presentation. OK = 1. word length; 2. presented as if the audience were interested peers, not only the instructor; conveys your contribution to 3. the evolving focus of your AR team; 4. the research to support the changes your team proposes; 5. the building of an audience/constituency for those changes.
Evaluation clock OK = 1. comparson steps 2-4 identify a specific change and its effects to evaluate; 2. the full clock spelled out with actual or plausible steps that; 3. relate to the specific comparison; and 4. answer the questions.
B. Project
i. initial description. OK = Overview conveys 1. subject, 2. audience, and 3. your reason for working on this project. 4. Subject relates to the sound use of computers and educational technology. 5. One-two prose paragraphs (not bullets).
ii. notes on research and planning OK = 1. notes on your reading and your thinking organized to elicit comments; 2. show that you are finding out what others have been doing in your area of interest; 3. full citations recorded for your sources, including WWW sources; 4. Updated overview; 5. Outline and/or annotated bibliography of readings done or planned.
iii. work-in-progress presentation OK= 13-15 minutes incl. 3-5 minutes of Q&A; 2. conveys the important features of work you have already done; 3. indicates where additional investigation or advice are needed and where you think that might lead you.
iv. complete draft. OK= 1. gets to the end to count, even if some sections along the way are only sketches; 2. not directed to the instructor, but conceived as something helpful to your teacher colleagues; 3. Grab readers' attention, Orient them, and move through Steps so that they appreciate the Position you have led them to and how it matches the subject of your project.
v. final report. OK= 1. 1500-2500 words; 2. bibliography of references cited; 3. revised in response to comments from instructor and peer on complete draft; 4. time allowed for the additional investigation and thinking that comments may entail.

Participation items (5 participation points for each one fulfilled up to maximum of 80)
C. Prepared participation and attendance at class meetings. One item fulfilled for each class attended except NOT if you arrive late and have been more than 10 minutes late once or more before or if you are clearly unprepared/un-participating and have been so once before.
D. Professional Development (PD) Workbook. One item fulfilled if you submit your workbook for perusal week 7 and another if you submit it in at the end of the semester and it shows you have responded to suggestions and been working consistently between classes.
E. In-office or phone conferences. One item fulfilled for each of two conferences on your assignments and project, one before week 6 and the other between then and week 12, except appointments missed without notifying me in advance count as a participation item not fulfilled.
F. Assignment Check-list. One item fulfilled if check-list is maintained and is submitted in week 12
G. Peer commentary. One item fulfilled for commentary on another student's draft report with copy submitted to PT.
H. Process Review. One item fulfilled if process review with 250-500 word cover note and 4-6 annotated examples that capture the process of development of your work and thinking is included with your PD Workbook at end-of-semester perusal.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

(on reserve in Healey unless otherwise noted)
Calhoun, E. F. (1994). How to Use Action Research in the Self-Renewing School. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Carr, W. and S. Kemmis (1986). Becoming Critical: Education, Knowledge and Action Research. Geelong: Deakin University Press., chapters 6 & 7 (up to p. 200)

Cashin, W. E. (1990). "Student ratings of teaching: A summary of the research." Management Newsletter 4(1): 2-7.

CEDAC (Community Economic Development Advisory Committee) (1995). Our Economy: Our Future, Final Report. York, Ontario: City of York.

Elbow, P. (1981). Writing with Power. New York: Oxford Univ. Press

Greenwald, N. (2000). "Learning from Problems." The Science Teacher 67(April): 28-32.

Greenwald, N. (2000). Science in Progress: Challenges in Problem-based Learning for Secondary Schools

Greenwood, D. J. and M. Levin (1998). Introduction To Action Research: Social Research For Social Change. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Hitchcock, G. and D. Hughes (1995). Research and the Teacher: A Qualitative Introduction to School-based Research. New York: Routledge.

Hunt, M. (1985). "The dilemma in the classroom: A cross-sectional survey measures the effects of segregated schooling," in Profiles of Social Research: The Scientific Study of Human Interactions. New York: Russell Sage, 51-97.

Institute of Cultural Affairs, n.d., Facilitators Manual (excerpts on Strategic Participatory Planning). Toronto: Canadian Institute of Cultural Affairs.

Jenkins, M. (2000). "Action learning: Taking the time it takes." Paper presented to the International Association of Facilitators, Toronto, April 27 2000.

McLeod, M., P. Senge and M. Wheatley (2001). "Changing how we work." Shambhala Sun(January): 29-33.

Metcalf, S. (2002). "Reading between the lines." The Nation(Jan. 28): 18-22.

Patton, M. Q. (1982). Practical Evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.#

Pietro, D. S. (Ed.) (1983). Evaluation Sourcebook. New York: American Council of Voluntary Agencies for Foreign Service.

Rokovich, M. A., M. Stevens and J. Stallman (2000). "Implementing change at SJUSD: An unfinished case study." Presented to the International Association of Facilitators, Toronto, April 27 2000.

Senge, P., N. Cambron-McCabe, T. Lucas, B. Smith, J. Dutton and A. Kleiner (2000). "Fostering communities that learn," in Schools That Learn. New York: Currency.

Schmuck, R. (1997). Practical Action Research for Change. Arlington Heights, IL: Skylight.
Spencer, L. J. (1989). Winning Through Participation. Dubuque, Iowa: Kendall/Hunt

Stanfield, B. (Ed.) (1997). The Art of Focused Conversation. Toronto: Canadian Institute of Cultural Affairs.

Stanfield, B. (2000). The Courage To Lead: Transform Self, Transform Society. Gabriola Island BC: New Society Publishers.

Stark, J. S. and A. Thomas (Eds.) (1994). Assessment and Program Evaluation. Needham Heights, MA: Simon & Schuster. (in Healey stacks)

Taylor, P. J. (1999) "Constructing Heterogeneous Webs in Socio-Environmental Research." ms.

Taylor, P. J. (2001). Excerpt from "'Whose trees are these?' Bridging the divide between subjects and outsider-researchers," in R. Eglash and G. DiChiro (Eds.), Appropriating Technology: Vernacular Science and Social Power. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.

Turabian, K. L. (1996). A Manual For Writers of Term papers, Theses, and Disertations. Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press (in Healey reference section)

Weiss, C. H. (1998). Evaluation. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.#

Weissglass, J. (1990). "Constructivist listening for empowerment and change." The Educational Forum 54(4): 351-370.

Woodhead, M. (1988). "When psychology informs public policy." American Psychologist 43(6): 443-454.

# See also the compilation of chapter precis of these books on reserve.