CPSE 692R – Advanced Topics



CPSE 692R – Advanced Topics in Special Education

Winter Semester 2005

Syllabus

Instructor

Mary Anne Prater, Ph.D.

340E MCKB, prater@byu.edu, 801-422-1592

Office hours by appointment

Mission Statement of the BYU Special Education Programs

We maximize the potential of diverse learners with individualized educational needs to elevate their quality of life. We accomplish this by supporting the mission and aims of a BYU education as we integrate teaching, research, and service. We specifically:

• Prepare competent and moral educators who select, implement, and

evaluate research-based effective teaching practices and appropriate curriculum for learners with special needs.

• Prepare master special educators who provide collaborative leadership to foster the moral development and improve learning and social competence of exceptional children with challenging behaviors.

• Add to the knowledge base of special education and related

disciplines through research.

• Serve and advocate for learners with individualized educational

needs and others who support them.

Course Description

This course is designed as a seminar in which significant issues, research, and trends related to individuals with disabilities are presented. The major purpose is to familiarize students with current and emerging topics in the field.

Course Objectives

Upon completion of this course students will be able to:

1. Identify current topics in the field of special education.

2. Defend varying positions regarding current topics.

3. Evaluate the validity of opinions based on empirically based evidence.

4. Generate their own opinions based on empirical evidence.

Required Readings

Text: Byrnes, M. A. (2004). Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial issues in special education. Guilford, CN: McGraw-Hill.

Additional required readings are listed at the end of the syllabus.

Course Expectations

1. Students will adhere to the BYU Honor Code.

2. Students will attend every class and actively participate in discussions, activities, and group work. Late arrivals or early departures are inappropriate.

3. Students will be respectful of all members of the class.

4. Students will complete all assignments on time.

Assignments

Reaction Papers

Students must read all readings and submit a typed reaction paper for each set of readings prior to discussion of the topic in class. The reaction papers should include the following elements using the headings provided and should adhere to the length identified for each. Students may e-mail their responses to the instructor prior to 3:00 p.m. each Tuesday (send as an attachment please) or bring a hard-copy to class.

The content and format for the reaction papers appears below. Please use the headings as provided.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Name_______________________ Date_______________________ Set #____

Major Points:

List 5-8 major points you gleaned from all the readings in this set (1-2 sentences each).

1 –

2 –

3 –

Selected Article(s):

Identify 2 articles that you found to be the most interesting, provocative,and/or helpful. Describe the major points of the author(s) and why you selected each article (2 paragraphs – 1 for each article).

Overall Opinion:

Describe your overall opinion regarding this topic. You may select either the whole set of readings (major points) or the selected articles (1-2 paragraph).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Additional instructions: The reaction papers do not need to be double spaced and a reference list does not need to be provided. Each article addressed in the paper should, however, be cited appropriately within the text (using APA format).

Letter grades will be assigned to the reaction papers using the following evaluation criteria and will represent 35% of the final grade.

• Did the writer clearly read the readings?

• Did the writer demonstrate an understanding of the major ideas?

• Is the writing clear and understandable?

• Did the writer follow directions in terms of headings, length, and APA standards?

• Did the writer use appropriate conventions (e.g., spelling, grammar)?

Presentations

Students will select one topic for which they will present information and lead the class discussion. Each presentation should include: (a) an overview of the topic and articles read (e.g., discussion of each reading or a synthesized discussion), (b) additional information from sources other than those read by other class members, (c) a discussion involving the whole class, and (d) an activity involving the whole class. The presentations should last approximately 2 hours and 15 minutes.

A letter grade will be assigned to the presentation and will represent 30% of the total grade. The following criteria will be used to evaluate the presentations:

• Was the topic presented in an overview?

• Did the presenter cover the content of all assigned readings as part of the presentation?

• Did the presenter add additional information?

• Did the presenter provide an activity?

• Did the presenter use and promote discussion?

• Was the whole class involved in the activity and discussion?

• Did the presenter differentiate between opinion and research or fact?

• Did the presenter use the time assigned and use it appropriately?

• Was the presenter prepared?

• How well was the overall session organized?

• Was the presenter professional in terms of overall presentation style?

Attendance, Tardiness, and Participation

Students are expected to be in attendance, on time, and to participate in class discussion and activities.

• For every absence (excused or unexcused), the student’s overall grade will be lowered by 3%. That is, if the student’s final grade equaled 90% and s/he was absent twice (2 x 3%), the total grade assigned would equal 84%. That is necessary inasmuch as the valuable interaction and discussion that occurs during class time cannot be made-up.

• For every tardy over 10 minutes, the student’s overall grade will be lowered by 1%. For every tardy over 45 minutes, the student’s overall grade will be lowered by 2%.Tardiness makes it difficult for the presenter to begin instruction and takes valuable time away from those who arrive on time.

Take-Home Final

A take-home final will be given and will consist of several essay questions dealing with the issues discussed. Responses must be typed and may be submitted through e-mail or hand delivered. A letter grade will be assigned to the final, which will represent 35% of the total grade. The following criteria will be used to evaluate responses on the take-home final:

Content – 70%

• Are the writer’s facts correct?

• Did the writer answer the question completely?

• Did the writer differentiate between fact and opinion?

• Did the writer demonstrate an understanding of the concepts and facts?

• Is the reader convinced?

Writing – 20%

• Is the writing clear and understandable?

• Is the response well organized?

• Is there a logical flow of ideas?

Conventions – 10%

• Did the writer use citations of the readings?

• Was a reference list provided?

• Did the writer use appropriate conventions (e.g., spelling, grammar)?

• Did the writer adhere to page approximations and are the responses typed and double-spaced?

• Did the writer adhere to APA standards?

Grades

Letter grades will be assigned for each of the course requirements and converted to percentages as follows: A = 95%, A- = 90%, B+ = 86%, B = 83%, B- = 80%, C+ = 76%, C = 73%, C- = 70%. In order to compute the overall grade, these letter grades will be weighted as follows:

Reaction papers 35%

Presentation 30%

Final 35%

As described above, 3% will be subtracted for each absence and 1-2% for each tardy.

Other Information

Preventing Sexual Harassment

Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 prohibits sex discrimination against any participant in an educational program or activity that receives federal funds. The act is intended to eliminate sex discrimination in education. Title IX covers discrimination in programs, admissions, activities, and student-to-student sexual harassment. BYU’s policy against sexual harassment extends not only to employees of the university but to students as well. If you encounter unlawful sexual harassment or gender based discrimination, please talk to your professor; contact the Equal Employment Office at 422-5895 or 367-5689 (24-hours); or contact the Honor Code Office at 422-2847.

Students With Disabilities

Brigham Young University is committed to providing a working and learning atmosphere which reasonably accommodates qualified persons with disabilities. If you have any disability which may impair your ability to complete this course successfully, please contact the University Accessibility Center (422-2767). Reasonable academic accommodations are reviewed for all students who have qualified documented disabilities. Services are coordinated with the student and instructor by the SSD Office. If you need assistance or if you feel you have been unlawfully discriminated against of the basis of disability, you may seek resolution through established grievance policy and procedures. You should contact the Equal Employment Office at 422-5895, D-282 ASB.

Calendar

|Date |Topic |Facilitator/ |Readings |Assign-ment |

| | |Presenter | | |

|01/04 |Introduction to Course |Mary Anne | | |

|01/11 |NO CLASS | | | |

|01/18 |Special Education as a Profession, EBD and MR |Mary Anne |Set 1 |Reaction paper |

|01/25 |LD and ADHD |Mary Anne |Set 2 |Reaction paper |

|02/01 |Inclusion & Accommodations |Melanie |Set 3 |Reaction paper |

|02/08 |NCLB issues |Heather |Set 4 |Reaction paper |

|02/15 |Charter Schools, Vouchers, and Home Schooling |Terri |Set 5 |Reaction paper |

|02/22 |NO CLASS | | | |

|03/01 |Diversity within Special Populations |Mary Anne |Set 6 |Reaction paper |

|03/08 |Controversial Practices – Part 1 |Marenda |Set 7 |Reaction paper |

|03/15 |Controversial Practices – Part 2 |Nari |Set 8 |Reaction paper |

|03/22 |Teacher Recruitment and Retention |Linda |Set 9 |Reaction paper |

|04/05 |NO CLASS | | | |

|04/12 |Attitudes and Advocacy |Mary Anne |Set 10 |Reaction paper |

|04/19 | | | |Take-home final due |

Readings

Set 1. Special Education as a Profession, Mental Retardation, and Emotional/Behavioral Disorders

• Text: Issue 1: Is special education an illegitimate profession?

• McLeskey, J. (2004). Classic articles in special education: Articles that shaped the field, 1960 to 1996. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 79-87.

• Weymeyer, M. L. (2003). Defining mental retardation and ensuring access to the general curriculum. Education and Training in Developmental Disabilities, 38, 271-282.

• Text: Issue 5: Does society have the capacity to prevent emotional/behavioral disabilities?

• Olympia, D., Farley, M., Christiansen, E., Pettersson, H., Jenson, W., & Clark, E. (2004). Social maladjustment and students with behavioral and emotional disorders: Revisiting basic assumptions and assessment issues. Psychology in the Schools, 41, 835-847.

Set 2. Learning Disabilities and Attention Deficit (Hyperactivity) Disorder

• *Readings: Issue 14: Are learning disabilities a myth?

• Text: Issue 14: Can brain scans unravel the mystery of learning disabilities?

• Mellard, D. (2004). Understanding responsiveness to intervention in learning disabilities determination. Retrieved December 21, 2004 from .

• Adelman, K. A., & Adelman, H. S. (1987). Rodin, Patton, Edison, Wilson, Einstein: Were they really learning disabled? Journal of Learning Disabilities, 20, 270-279.

• *Readings: Issue 15: Is attention deficit hyperactivity disorder real?

• Text: Issue 15: Is attention deficit (hyperactivity) disorder overdiagnosed?

Set 3. Inclusion and Accommodations

• Text: Issue 9: Does Inclusion Work?

• Text: Issue 10: Does full inclusion deliver a good education?

• Text: Issue 19: Have schools gone too far in using accommodations?

• Burnstein, N., Sears, S., Wilcoxen, A., Cabello, B., & Spagna, M. (2004). Moving toward inclusive practices. Remedial and Special Education, 25, 104-116.

• Kamens, M. W., Loprete, S. J., & Slostad, F. A. (2003). Inclusive classrooms: What practicing teachers want to know. Action in Teacher Education, 25, 20-26.

Set 4. No Child Left Behind

• Text: Issue 12: Should students with disabilities be exempt from standards-based curriculum?

• Text: Issue 13: Are the least-trained teaching our most needy children?

• Text: Issue 20: Should students with disabilities participate in high-stakes testing?

• Allbritten, D., Mainzer, R., & Ziegler, D. (2004). Will students with disabilities be scapegoats for school failures? Educational Horizon, 82, 153-160.

• Ysseldyke, J. et al. (2004). What we know and need to know about the consequences of high-stakes testing for students with disabilities, Exceptional Children, 71, 75-94.

Set 5. Charter Schools, Vouchers, and Home Schooling

• Text: Issue 4: Does school choice open doors for students with disabilities?

• Estes, M. B. (2004). Choice for all? Charter schools and students with special needs. The Journal of Special Education, 37, 257-267.

• Downing, J. E., Spencer, S., & Cavallaro, C. (2004). The development of an inclusive charter elementary school: Lessons learned. Research and Practice for Persons with Severe Disabilities, 29, 11-24.

• Davis, M. R. (2004). Utah passes special education voucher bill, Education Week, 27(23), 31-37.

• Caire, K. M. S. (2002). The truth about vouchers. Educational Leadership, 39(7), 38-42.

• Miner, B. (1998). Why I don’t vouch for vouchers. Educational Leadership, 10(2), 40-42.

• Pavlides, M. (2004). Homeschooling children with disabilities: Balancing freedom and responsibilitity. The Review of Disability Studies, 1(2), 100-109.

Set 6. Diversity within Special Populations

• Text: Issue 2: Is eliminating overrepresentation beyond the scope of public schools?

• McIntyre, T. (1996). Does the way we teach create behavior disorders in culturally different students? Education and Treatment of Children, 19, 354-370.

• Jensen, R. J. (2004). Discipline preferences and styles among Latino families: Implications for special educators. Multiple Voices, 7(1), 60-73.

• Harriott, W. A., & Martin, S. S. (2004). Using culturally responsive activities to promote social competence and classroom community. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 37(1), 48-54.

• Schneider, M. E., & Owens, R. E. (2000). Concern for lesbian, gay, and bisexual kids: The benefits for all children. Education and Urban Society, 32, 349-367.

Set 7. Controversial Practices – Part 1

• Text: Issue 18: Are there scientifically effective treatments for autism?

• Heward, W. L. (2003). Ten faulty notions about teaching and learning that hinder the effectiveness of special education. The Journal of Special Education, 36, 186-205.

• McWilliam, R. A. (1999). Controversial practices: The need for a reacculturation of early intervention fields. Teaching Early Childhood Special Education, 19, 177-188.

• Pescara-Kovach, L. A., & Alexander, K. (1994). The link between food ingested and problem behavior: Fact or fallacy? Behavioral Disorders, 19, 142-148.

• Ravitz, J. (2004, December 17). Special room is connection to world for disabled kids. The Salt Lake Tribune. Retrieved December 17, 2004, from .

• Hogg, J., Cavet, J., Lambe, L., & Smeddle, M. (2001). The use of ’Snoezelen’ as multisensory stimulation with people with intellectual disabilities: A review of the research. Research in Developmental Disabilities, 22, 353-372.

Set 8. Controversial Practices – Part 2

• Text: Issue 16: Are we over-prescribing medication to solve our children’s problems?

• Jorgenson, O. (2003). Brain scam? Why educators should be careful about embracing ‘brain research.’ The Educational Forum, 67, 364-369.

• Burke, K., & Dunn, R. (2002). Learning style-based teaching to raise minority student test scores: There’s no debate! Clearing House, 76(2), 103-106.

• Stellwagen, J. B. (2001). A challenge to the learning style advocates. Clearing House, 74(5), 265-268.

• Gardner, H. (1995). Reflections on multiple intelligences: Myths and messages. Phi Delta Kappan, 77, 200-203.

• Mathews, J. (2004, September 7). 21 years later, ‘multiple intelligences’ still debated. The Washington Post. Retrieved December 17, 2004, from .

• LoBello, S. G., Wolfe, G. L., Gulgoz, S., & Doleys, B. B. (1998). Background color and phonological processing in sample of elementary school students with reading difficulties. Reading Improvement, 35, 15-22.

Set 9. Teacher Recruitment and Retention

• Menlove, R., Garnes, L., & Salzberg, C. (2004). Why special educators leave and where they go. Teacher Education and Special Education, 27, 373-383.

• Kaff, M. S. (2004). Multitasking is multitaxing: Why special educators are leaving the field. Preventing School Failure, 48, 10-17.

• Lindner, R. W., & Healy, D. E., Jr. (2004). Perceived stress and use of coping strategies as a response to rapidly changing student demographics. Multiple Voices, 7(1), 74-94.

• Shepherd, T. L., & Brown, R. D. (2003). Analyzing certification options for special education teachers. TEACHING Exceptional Children, 35(6), 26-30.

• Dieker, L. A., McTigue, A., Campbell, G., Rodriquez, J., Savage, M., & Jackson-Thomas, A. (2003). Voices from the field: Teachers from culturally and linguistically diverse backgrounds entering the profession through alternative certification. Teacher Education and Special Education, 26, 328-340.

• Prater, M. A. (2005). Ethnically diverse rural special educators who are highly qualified: Does NCLB make this impossible? Rural Special Educator Quarterly.

Set 10. Attitudes and Advocacy

• McCarthy, H. (2003). The disability rights movement: Experiences and perspectives of selected leaders in the disability community. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 46, 209-223.

• Rao, S. (2004). Faculty attitudes and students with disabilities in higher education: A literature review. College Student Journal, 38, 191-198.

• McMahon, B. T., West, S. L., Lewis, A. N., Armstrong, A. J., & Conway, J. P. (2004). Hate crimes and disability in America. Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin, 47(2), 66-75.

• Perske, R. (2004). Thoughts after the fatal beating of Ricky Whistnant. Mental Retardation, 42, 232-236.

• Burgstahler, S., & Doe, T. (2004). Disability-related simulations: If, when, and how to use them in professional development. The Review of Disability Studies, 1(2), 8-18.

• Prater, M. A., Dyches, T. T., & Johnstun, M. (2005). Teaching students about learning disabilities through children’s literature. Intervention in School and Clinic.

• Hunsberger, M. B. (2004). Making the ‘why nots’ possible for children with disabilities. Exceptional Parent, 34(4), 22-28.

• Illinois Department of Rehabilitation Services (1994). Handicapping language: A guide for journalists and the public. Remedial and Special Education, 15, 60-62.

*Taken from Brynes, M. A. (2002). Taking sides: Clashing views on controversial issues in special education. Guilford, CT: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download