Syllabus Entrance
Printer Friendly
Email Syllabus

HN 302 Honors Scholarship
Wilson, Catherine


PARK UNIVERSITY__________________________________________________
SYLLABUS


HN 302, Honors Scholarship

INSTRUCTOR INFORMATION:
Name
Title: Catherine Wilson
Office: Copley 320
Office Hours: M-F 9:00-10:00; 11:30-1:00; W 9:00-10:30
Office Phone: 816-584-6342
email address: catherinew@mail.park.edu

COURSE INFORMATION:
Semester dates: January 10-May 6
Classes: Weekly meetings with advisor
Location: Copley 320
Three credit hours
Prerequisites: Satisfactory completion of HN 300

MISSION STATEMENT
The mission of Park University, an entrepreneurial institution of learning, is to provide access to academic excellence, which will prepare learners to think critically, communicate effectively and engage in lifelong learning while serving a global community.
VISION STATEMENT
Park University will be a renowned international leader in providing innovative educational opportunities for learners within the global society.

COURSE DESCRIPTION: This course must be taken a minimum of two (2) semesters and can be taken for an additional semester. The continue participation in the Program requires approval of the advisor(s) and the Honors Committee. The advisor(s) will directly oversee and guide the student and the student must continue to progress in their plan of study.

FACULTY’S EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY: Becoming a teacher is a complex process that occurs most effectively in learning communities that provide rich opportunities for inquiry and reflection, and that cultivate a sense of curiosity, integrity, social justice, and professionalism.

COURSE OBJECTIVES: Students excelling in this course will be able to:
1. Plan the path of exploration and writing for this and subsequent semesters.
2. Plan the final project and the presentations.

Specific goals for the project:
1. Learn to document children’s thinking, intentions, and questions
2. Examine how an individual teacher implements elements of the philosophy of education in Reggio Emilia, Italy in a publicly funded half-day preschool program in a culturally diverse setting.
3. Compare the experiences of a Head Start education consultant (supervising a teaching staff) and a classroom teacher in implementing elements of the Reggio approach.


COURSE TEXTBOOK(S):
Gandini, L., & Kaminsky, J. A. (2004). Reflections on the relationship between documentation and assessment in the American context. Innovations in Early Education. 11, 5-17.

Horm-Wingerd, D. M. (2002). The Reggio Emilia approach and accountability assessment in the United States. In V. R. Fu, A. J. Stremmel, & L. T. Hill (Eds.) Teaching and learning: Collaborative exploration of the Reggio Emilia approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall, pp. 51-65. (Week 6)

Katz, L. G. (1998). What can we learn from Reggio Emilia? In C. Edwards, L. Gandini, & G. Forman (Eds.), the hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia approach – Advanced reflections. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing, pp. 27-45. (Week 7)

Krechevsky. M., Stork, J. (2000). Challenging educational assumptions: Lessons from an Italian-American collaboration. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30, 1-21.
New, R. (1998). Theory and praxis in Reggio Emilia: They know what they are doing, and why. In C. Edwards, L. Gandini, & G. Forman (Eds.), the hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia approach – Advanced reflections. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing, pp. 261-284.
New, R. (1999). What should children learn? Making choices and taking chances. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 1, 1-18. http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v1n2/new.html
Nimmo, J. (1998). The child in community: Constraints from the early childhood lore. In C. Edwards, L. Gandini, & G. Forman (Eds.), the hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia approach – Advanced reflections. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing, pp.295-312.
Oken-Wright, P, & Gravett, M. (2002). In V. R. Fu, A. J. Stremmel, & L. T. Hill (Eds.) Teaching and learning: Collaborative exploration of the Reggio Emilia approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall, pp.197-220.
Project Zero/Reggio Children. Making learning visible: Children as individual and group learners. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education.
Shafer, A. (2002). Ordinary moments, extraordinary possibilities. In V. R. Fu, A. J. Stremmel, & L. T. Hill (Eds.) Teaching and learning: Collaborative exploration of the Reggio Emilia approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall, pp.183-195.

Tegano, D. W. (2002). Passion and the art of teaching: Teaching as an art, art as imagination, imagination as passion. In V. R. Fu, A. J. Stremmel, & L. T. Hill (Eds.) Teaching and learning: Collaborative exploration of the Reggio Emilia approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill
Prentice Hall, pp. 161-179.
Vecchi, V. (2001). The curiosity to understand. In Project Zero/Reggio Children Making learning visible: Children as individual and group learners. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education, pp. 158-212.

Teacher Journals (Northland Head Start and Pershing Early Childhood)

ACADEMIC HONESTY: “Academic Honesty is required of all members of a learning community. Hence, Park will not tolerate cheating or plagiarism on tests, examinations, papers or other course assignments. Students who engage in such dishonesty may be given failing grades or expelled from Park.”


PLAGIARISM: Plagiarism—the appropriation or imitation of the language or ideas of another person and presenting them as one’s original work—sometimes occurs through carelessness or ignorance. Students who are uncertain about proper documentation of sources should consult their instructors.”


ATTENDANCE POLICY: "Instructors are required to keep attendance records and report absences. The instructor may excuse absences for cogent reasons, but missed work must be made up within the term of enrollment. Work missed through unexcused absences must also be made up within the term of enrollment, but unexcused absences may carry further penalties. In the event of two consecutive weeks of unexcused absences in a term of enrollment, the student will be administratively withdrawn, resulting in a grade of “F”. An Incomplete will not be issued to a student who has unexcused or excessive absences recorded for a course. Students receiving Military Tuition Assistance (TA) or Veterans Administration (VA) educational benefits must not exceed three unexcused absences in the term of enrollment. Excessive absences will be reported to the appropriate agency and may result in a monetary penalty to the student. Reports of F grade (attendance or academic) resulting from excessive absence for students receiving financial assistance from agencies not mentioned above will be reported to the appropriate agency."


PERSONAL ATTENDANCE POLICY:

The student and honors advisor(s) should meet regularly throughout the course of the project to discuss concerns, progress, and expectations. It is important to maintain an open line of communication.


COURSE ARRANGEMENTS:

The student should expect to spend an average of 7-10 hours per week working on their project; thus over the course of a semester, the student will devote approximately 100–150 hours per semester to their honors project. The nature of research means that there will be some weeks where little time is spent on the project and other times when the student will be spending all their spare time working on research.

Attendance at field site (Pershing Early Childhood) one half-day per week for 8 weeks.

COURSE ASSESSMENT and GRADING PLAN:
1. Thoughtful, well-developed journal entries connecting readings to fieldwork. (Five journal entries 20pts. each) 100 pts.
2. Documentation of children’s thinking. 100 pts
3. Interviews with teacher and education consultant. (Three interviews 20pts. each) 60 pts.
4. Presentation of research progress. 100pts.

DISABILITY GUIDELINES: Park University is committed to meeting the needs of all students that meet the criteria for special assistance. These guidelines are designed to supply directions to students concerning the information necessary to accomplish this goal. It is Park University’s policy to comply fully with federal and state law, including Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the American with Disabilities Act of 1990, regarding students with disabilities and, to the extent of any inconsistency between these guidelines and federal and/or state law, the provisions of the law will apply. Additional information concerning Park University’s policies and procedures related to disability can be found on the Park University web page: www.park.edu/disability.

Topics Date Reading
Learning to see and listen Jan 10-14 Shafer, A. (2002). Ordinary moments, extraordinary possibilities. In V. R. Fu, A. J. Stremmel, & L. T. Hill (Eds.) Teaching and learning: Collaborative exploration of the Reggio Emilia approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall, pp.183-195.

Learning to seek the child’s intentions Jan 17-21 Oken-Wright, P, & Gravett, M. (2002). In V. R. Fu, A. J. Stremmel, & L. T. Hill (Eds.) Teaching and learning: Collaborative exploration of the Reggio Emilia approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall, pp.197-220.

Qualities in an observant teacher Jan 24-28 Tegano, D. W. (2002). Passion and the art of teaching: Teaching as an art, art as imagination, imagination as passion. In V. R. Fu, A. J. Stremmel, & L. T. Hill (Eds.) Teaching and learning: Collaborative exploration of the Reggio Emilia approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill
Prentice Hall, pp. 161-179.

Inquiry in learning and teaching Jan 31-Feb 4 Vecchi, V. (2001). The curiosity to understand. In Project Zero/Reggio Children Making learning visible: Children as individual and group learners. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education, pp. 158-212.

Documentation and assessment



Feb 7-11 Gandini, L., & Kaminsky, J. A. (2004). Reflections on the relationship between documentation and assessment in the American context. Innovations in Early Education. 11, 5-17.

Assessment Feb 14-18 Horm-Wingerd, D. M. (2002). The Reggio Emilia approach and accountability assessment in the United States. In V. R. Fu, A. J. Stremmel, & L. T. Hill (Eds.) Teaching and learning: Collaborative exploration of the Reggio Emilia approach. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice Hall, pp. 51-65. (Week 6)

Reflecting on provocations from the Reggio approach: Lilian Katz Feb 21-25 Katz, L. G. (1998). What can we learn from Reggio Emilia? In C. Edwards, L. Gandini, & G. Forman (Eds.), the hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia approach – Advanced reflections. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing, pp. 27-45. (Week 7)

Reflecting on provocations from the Reggio approach: Project Zero Feb 28-March 4 Krechevsky. M., Stork, J. (2000). Challenging educational assumptions: Lessons from an Italian-American collaboration. Cambridge Journal of Education, 30, 1-21.

SPRING BREAK
Reflecting on provocations from the Reggio approach: Rebecca New March 14-18 New, R. (1998). Theory and praxis in Reggio Emilia: They know what they are doing, and why. In C. Edwards, L. Gandini, & G. Forman (Eds.), the hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia approach – Advanced reflections. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing, pp. 261-284.
Reflecting on provocations from the Reggio approach: Rebecca New March 21-24 New, R. (1999). What should children learn? Making choices and taking chances. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 1, 1-18. http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v1n2/new.html

Reflecting on provocations from the Reggio approach: John Nimmo March 28-April 1 Nimmo, J. (1998). The child in community: Constraints from the early childhood lore. In C. Edwards, L. Gandini, & G. Forman (Eds.), the hundred languages of children: The Reggio Emilia approach – Advanced reflections. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing, pp.295-312.

Making changes: Provocations for teachers April 4-8 Project Zero/Reggio Children. Making learning visible: Children as individual and group learners. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education.

Preparation for presentation April 11-15
Preparation for presentation April 18-22
April 25-29