Course Syllabus

Georgia Southern University

College of Education
Educational Leadership
EDLD 8435
Higher Education Policy
(3 Credits)
Fall Session 2011

Instructor:
Dr. Devon Jensen

Phone: (912) 478-7267 (work) or (912) 489-1143 (home)

Email: devonjensen@georgiasouthern.edu
Just as a note, if you are having problems in the class and need to
talk to me personally, please dont hesitate to call me at either of
the numbers above. I do some work at home, so dont be afraid to
call me at home during the day or in the evening if you cant reach
me in my office. I would be happy to help you through it.

11/4/10

2
Dates:
This class will officially run from August 22nd to December 15th, 2011. In other words, we will
have 15 weeks of instructional time together.
Since this class will operate under the structure of weekly modules, the first module will be
available on Monday, August 22nd and the last module will end on Thursday, December 15th,
2011.
Course Description:
This course examines the concepts behind public policy with a specific focus on policy in the
Higher Education sector. Using relevant and current policy issues facing higher education in the
United States as a guide, this course will further explore the policy-formation processes, the
skills of policy analysis and policy development, the identification of policy issues appropriate
for study at these institutions, and the relationship of policy to all other areas of administration.
Rationale:
A reflective decision making model for preparing educators provides the framework supporting
the College of Education professional programs. Reflective leaders are skilled educators whose
practice and decisions integrate theory, research, and experiential wisdom. Reflective decision
making engages administrators and educators in cycles of thought and action based on
theoretical, ethical, and professional knowledge.
Instructor Teaching Philosophy:
The goal for graduate education should be to develop critically reflective educators whose
practice and decisions integrate theory, research, and experiential wisdom in their professional
and personal lives. As a result of their graduate education, learners should develop strong
theoretical frameworks so that they can be critically reflective educators. The best manner to
develop theoretical frameworks is to read extensively in the field and critically examine the
literature with others in a collaborative learning environment.
In a collaborative learning environment, both the teacher and learner are mutual partners in the
learning process. The role of the teacher is to facilitate the collaborative learning process based
on mutual respect for all the learners, positive interdependence among the learners, and
individual accountability for creating and maintaining the collaborative learning process.
Course Readings:
This course will not have a specifically assigned textbook. Instead, we will be using current
research, journal articles, and our own experience as our guide for exploring the field of study in
which we are engaged. These readings will all be available on the Georgia View website for this

3
class. The readings will either be available through links to specific websites or through pdf
documents that will posted on the website as well.
These readings will be a wonderful exploration of the literature in this field of study, but it will
by means not be exhaustive. It is hoped that students will be self-directed and seek out further
readings on topics raised in class that are of particular interest to the students. When appropriate,
additional readings will be noted as a resource and students can choose to seek out these readings
if desired.
Major Instructional Goals:
1. To develop an understanding of public policymaking and the relative influence of state and
national governments on postsecondary education;
2. To understand the historical origins and contemporary status of American higher education
policy;
3. To examine the roles of key public officials, interest groups, political parties, the media,
and public opinion;
4. To become familiar with the policy issues shaping the future of American postsecondary
education;
5. To determine the utility of theoretical and conceptual models of policymaking;
6. To enhance skills for analysis and advocacy of public policies and critical thinking about
policy dilemmas;
7. To become familiar with the implications of diversity in higher education policymaking;
and
8. To develop an acquaintance with the professional literature of higher education policy.
Relationship to COE Conceptual Framework:
The course objectives specifically address the four commitments that form the College of
Education's conceptual framework:
A. Commitment to the Knowledge and Dispositions of the Profession:
Knowledge of the underlying constructs of Higher Education Policy is a fundamental element of
the profession. Candidate learning activities are focused on professional knowledge specifically
related to understanding the various components of Higher Education Policy as illustrated in
complex educational institutions.

4
B. Commitment to Diversity:
Candidates are exposed to the various components of educational policy, including the diversity
evident throughout higher education policy. Candidates focus on the of role diversity in higher
education policymaking and how the concept of diversity has changed higher education
policymaking. Candidates research, write and discuss how these constructs impact all learners
and participants in higher education.
C. Commitment to Technology:
Candidates use technology to analyze and critique the various policymaking constructs and to
report their findings. Candidates use GeorgiaView to communicate with each other and to submit
their written materials.
D. Commitment to the Practice of Continuous Reflection and Assessment:
After the learning experience of policymaking in higher education, candidates reflect on the
relationship between their personal knowledge of the various constructs in comparison with other
candidates. They also critique and assess the impact of their uses of the constructs on the
performance in their educational institutions.
Class Policies
The Department of Leadership, Technology, and Human Development within the College of
Education at Georgia Southern University is committed to providing an environment of equality
and respect for all people within the university community, and to educating faculty, staff, and
students in developing teaching and learning contexts that are welcoming for all. The integrity of
the University community is contingent upon fulfillment of a trust that members of the student
body will engage in reasonable behaviors to promote and protect the educational environment.
Plagiarism, which is defined as, but not limited to, the following: the use of paraphrase or direct
quotation, of published or unpublished work of another person without full and clear
acknowledgement. The unacknowledged use of materials prepared by another person or agency
engaged in the selling of term papers or other academic materials is also considered plagiarism.
Course assignments are the responsibility of the student. It is expected that assignments will be
turned in on or before the date indicated on the course schedule. It is the students responsibility
to reschedule due dates prior to the assigned date. It is also expected that the instructor will
provide evaluative feedback in a timely manner.
Course Assignments
1) Participation:
Weighting = 25%
Details: This grade is based upon regular and thoughtful involvement in the course
activities and weekly modules.
2) Reflective Worksheets

Weighting = 40%

5
Details: Students will receive a total of 8 reflective worksheets throughout the semester
each being valued at 5% . These worksheets will be short assignments that challenge
students to either recall or reflect on material that has been studied in class either through
module work or discussion postings. Each reflective worksheet will become available at
the beginning of the respective module and will then be due by the end of the module.
Dates for each reflective worksheet are listed under the course structure area of this
syllabus.
3) Group Analysis of a Policy Issue

Weighting = 10%

Details: Students will be divided up into groups shortly after the class begins. In your
assigned groups, you will be responsible for picking a higher education policy issue and
then writing a 2 4 page (double-spaced) report on the current reality of this issue within
a specific state that your group decides. To find issues to explore, students will need to
go http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/issues/ This website has a list of headings that are
current policy issues in higher education. This is more a descriptive type paper where
you will be indicating what is currently happening within the given state your group
selects. More specific details on this assignment will be provided as the course
progresses and the groups are assigned. One paper will be submitted per group.
4) Final Project

Weighting = 25%

Details: For the final project, students will be required to write a maximum 10-page
paper (double-spaced) addressing the topic: What is Higher Education Policy?
Students should reflect on the course and the content studied and write a theoretical
opinion piece answering this question. The basic idea here is to imagine your audience as
future learners in the field of Higher Education Leadership and they know very little on
this topic. In writing this paper, you want these learners to develop a better
understanding of just what Higher Education Policy is? Relevant resources and examples
from Higher Education should be used to support the ideas raised in the paper. Students
should follow proper APA styling. This assignment will be due on the last day of classes
December 15th, 2011.
Grading System
Letter Grade
A
B
C
D
F

Percentage
100-90%
89-80%
79-70%
69-60%
Below 60%

6
Course Structure
Module 1 and
Course
Introduction
Aug. 22 Aug. 28

Topic: Introductions, What is Policy

Focus of Inquiry: What is Policy, What is Public Policy
Topic: Policy Analysis

Module 2
Aug. 29 Sept. 4

Focus of Inquiry: What do we mean by Policy Analysis, What is

policy analysis in Higher Education
Reflective Worksheet #1 Due at the end of this module

Module 3
Sept. 5 Sept. 11

Topic: Concepts behind Public Policy

Module 4
Sept. 12 Sept. 18

Topic: Public Policy Evaluation

Module 5
Sept. 19 Sept. 25

Topic: State Operating Support for Public Higher Education

Module 6
Sept. 26 Oct. 2

Topic: States College Completion and Educational Attainment

Agendas

Module 7
Oct. 3 Oct. 9

Topic: College Readiness

Module 8
Oct. 10 Oct. 16
Module 9
Oct. 17 Oct. 23
Module 10
Oct. 24 Oct. 30
Module 11
Oct. 31 Nov. 6
Module 12
Nov. 7 Nov. 13
Module 13
Nov. 14 - 20

Reflective Worksheet #2 Due at the end of this module

Reflective Worksheet #3 Due at the end of this module

Reflective Worksheet #4 Due at the end of this module

Topic: Tuition Prices and Policy
Topic: State Student Aid Program Financing
Reflective Worksheet #5 Due at the end of this module
Topic: Student Enrollment Capacity
Group Description of a State Policy Issue Due on Oct. 31st by 5:00
pm
Topic: State Data System Development
Reflective Worksheet #6 Due at the end of this module
Topic: Economic and Workforce Development
Topic: States Political Climate
Reflective Worksheet #7 Due at the end of this module

Module 14
Nov. 21 Nov. 27

Reading and Thanksgiving break No work scheduled for this week.

Enjoy the rest or the time to catch up on class work.

Module 15
Nov. 28 Dec. 4

Topic: States Regulatory Framework

Module 16
Dec. 4 Dec. 15

Topic: Concluding Thoughts

Reflective Worksheet #8 Due at the end of this module

Final Paper due on December 15th, 2011

Optional Readings to support the course work:

Altbach, P. G., Berdahl, R. O., & Gumport, P. J. (2005). American higher education in the
twenty-first century: Social, political, and economic challenges. Baltimore, MD: Johns
Hopkins University Press.
Bardach, E. (2005). A practical guide for policy analysis the eightfold path to more effective
problem solving. Washington, D.C.: CQ Press.
Burke, J.C. & Associates (2005). Achieving accountability in higher education. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-Bass
Heck, R.H. (2004). Studying educational and social policy. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum and
Associates.
Kingdon, (1998) The states and public higher education policy. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins
University Press
R. G. Ehrenberg (ed.) (2006). What's happening to public higher education? Westport, CT:
American Council on Education/Praeger.
St. John, E. P., & E. H. Asker (2003). Refinancing the college dream: Access, equal opportunity,
and justice for taxpayers. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.
Instructional Strategies/Activities/Technology
This course is designed to provide the learner with the opportunity to link the theoretical issues
presented in the readings with the practical aspects concerning higher education policy. To
facilitate linkages among the theoretical issues explored in class, the readings, and learners own
higher education experiences, learners will:

Read the weekly assignments

Engage in dialogue with peers on questions and topics generated by the instructor
Discuss topics related to the study of higher education policy

Actively engage in large and small group discussions, problem-solving activities, and
inquiry exercises
Complete written assignments
Integrate the use of technology into learning and research efforts

Student Ethics and Other Policy Information

University Policies
Academic Dishonesty
Candidates at Georgia Southern University are an essential part of the academic community, and
enjoy substantial freedom within the framework of the educational objectives of the institution.
The freedom necessary for learning in a community so rich in diversity and achieving success
toward our educational objectives requires high standards of academic integrity. Academic
dishonesty has no place in an institution of advanced learning. Georgia Southern University
considers academic integrity as essential part of each candidate's personal and intellectual
growth. Instances of academic dishonesty are addressed consistently. All members of the
community contribute actively to building a strong reputation of academic excellence and
integrity at Georgia Southern University.
It is each candidate's responsibility to know what constitutes academic dishonesty and to seek
clarification directly from the instructor if necessary. The Office of Judicial Affairs is located in
Russell Union room 2023 (912 486-7301). Examples of academic dishonesty include, but are not
limited to:

Submission of an assignment as the student's original work that is entirely or partly the
work of another person.
Failure to appropriately cite references from published or unpublished works or
print/non-print materials.
Unauthorized copying of an assignment in computer programming, or the unauthorized
examination or view of the computer, specifically during examinations.
Possession and/or unauthorized use of tests, notes, books, calculators or formulas stored
in calculators not authorized by the instructor during an examination.
Providing and/or receiving information from another student other than the instructor, by
any verbal or written means.
Observing or assisting another student's work.
Violation of the procedures prescribed by the professor to protect the integrity of the
examination.
Cooperation with a person involved in academic misconduct.

A candidate who has been accused of academic dishonesty will be asked to meet with the course
instructor. The matter can be resolved informally at the College level and/or an academic

9
sanction can be imposed. If the student opposes the decision, he/she may appeal to the College
Dean.
ADA Statement
Any candidate who has a disability that substantially limits learning in a higher education setting
may contact the Student Disability Resource Center) for information regarding their eligibility
for reasonable accommodations. The Center is Building 805 and the office telephone number is
478-0666.
Diversity
Together, we maintain an intellectual culture that is accessible, disciplined, free, safe, and
committed to excellence. By our behavior with one another we endorse a cultural of diversity,
celebrating the uniqueness of the individual and developing our understanding and tolerance of
differences in gender, ethnicity, age, spiritual belief, sexual orientation, and physical and mental
potential. We take responsibilities for sustaining a caring culture, nurturing growth and
fulfillment in one another and in the larger communities of which we are a part. We insist on a
culture of civility, united in our rejections of violence, coercion, deceit, or terrorism. We work to
increase collaboration, cooperation, and consensus within rational dialogue characterized by
mutual respect and consideration.
This is a responsible culture. We expect each member of our community to carry out responsibly
his or her duties for preserving the integrity, quality, and decency of our environment and our
discourse.
In order to accomplish the above-mentioned expectations and responsibilities, everyone must
engage in certain specific behaviors. Inside the classroom, the students are expected to respect
the sanctity of the teaching/learning process by expressing respect for the faculty member as the
organizer and guide through this learning experience, as well as for fellow students. Disruptive,
disrespectful, discriminatory, harassing, violent and/or threatening behavior is explicitly
prohibited.
Students are expected to be responsible for their own learning and, in return, can expect
responsible teaching from the faculty member.
Course Policies
Responsible Attendance and Absences
As an adult learner you most likely have multiple roles and commitments to juggle. In addition
to being a student, you may be an employee, a parent, a community leader, or a caregiver to a
family member. If you are a full-time candidate, you are working to learn a wide variety of new
skills and to meet the expectations for multiple courses. As your instructor, I too have many

10
responsibilities and multiple roles. Therefore, we need to work together to accomplish the
intended learning outcomes for this course.
Responsible attendance means that you will plan your schedule so that you can manage your
time so that you can complete your assignments and assessments on or before the date they are
due.
For my part, I have provided a syllabus with a schedule listing module sessions and due dates for
assignments and assessments. I will work to keep the course on the published schedule. If I make
adjustments in the schedule, I will provide written a notice explaining the change.
Ethics
Students are expected to display ethical behavior at all times. Cheating, plagiarism, etc., will not
be tolerated. The consequences of dishonest behavior will be commensurate with the activity to
include, but not be limited to, an 'F' for the class, dialogue with administrators, and dismissal
from the college.
Respect
Class participants will undoubtedly express different opinions on subjects discussed during the
course of the semester. Different opinions and professional critiques of ideas are welcomed in
this online course and should be discussed to gain further knowledge of the varied schematics
individuals use to pattern and understand environmental factors.
How to Get the Most from this Learning Experience

Take charge of your own learning. Raise questions, probe, explore, go after what you
need.
Be open. Use your imagination, consider new possibilities, and create something new for
yourself.
Give as well as receive. Give liberally to co-learners and be prepared to receive a great
deal from them.
Have fun. Plan to thoroughly enjoy this opportunity to learn and to grow in your
professional competence and satisfaction.

Useful Web Resources

American Council on Education http://www.acenet.edu/

Association of American Universities http://www.aau.edu/
Association of American Colleges and Universities https://www.aacu.org
American Association of State Colleges and Universities http://aascu.org/

11

American Association of University Professors http://www.aaup.org/

American Association of Community Colleges http://www.aacc.nche.edu/
Association of Governing Boards http://www.agb.org/
Association of Institutional Research http://airweb.org/
Association for the Study of Higher Education http://www.ashe.ws
Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching
http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/
Carnegie Foundation Classification of Institutions of Higher Education
http://www.carnegiefoundation.org/Classification/
Council for Higher Education Accreditation http://www.chea.org/
National Association of College and University Business Officers http://www.nacubo.org/
National Association of State Universities and Land Grant Colleges https://www.aplu.org
National Center for Postsecondary Improvement http://www.stanford.edu/group/ncpi
National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education http://www.highereducation.org/
Board of Regents http://www.usg.edu

Additional Readings
Basken, P. (2007, November). U.S. review of accreditors may produce a showdown. The
Chronicle of Higher Education, 54(14), A1. (Document ID: 1395946851).
Dill, D. D. (2007, draft). Federal policies and the academic research enterprise in the United
States. University of North Carolina Chapel Hill
Eaton, J. (2007). Institutions, accreditors, and the federal government - Redefining their
appropriate relationship. Change, 39(5), 16-23.
Field, K. (2007, November). Big bucks, red tape for colleges in Congress. The Chronicle of
Higher Education, 54(13), A1.
Fryshman, B. (2007). Outcomes assessment: No gain, all pain. Inside Higher Ed. November 13,
2007
Geiger, R. & Sa, C. (2005). Beyond technology transfer: U.S. state policies to harness university
research for economic development. Minerva 43, 1-21.
Gill, J. I. & L. Saunders (1992). Conducting policy analysis in higher education. Developing
effective policy analysis in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Immerwahr, J. (2004). Public attitudes on higher education: A trend analysis, 1993 to 2003. San
Jose, CA: National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, Report Number 04-2.
National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education (2005, July). The need for state policy
leadership. Special supplement to National CrossTalk.

12

National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. (2006). Measuring up ... the state report
card on higher education.
National Education Association (2003). Challenges and opportunities: State legislative views on
higher education, results of the 2003 higher education issues survey. Pp. iii-ix & 9-13.
Spellings Commission. (2006). A Test of Leadership: Charting the Future of U.S. Higher
Education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.
Schray, V. Assuring quality in higher education: Key issues and questions for changing
accreditation in the United States. Retrieved on August 19, 2011 from
http://www2.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/schray.pdf
Venezia, A., & Kirst, M. (2005). Inequitable opportunities: How current education systems and
policies undermine the chances for student persistence and success in college.
Educational Policy, 19(2), 283-307
Washington Higher Education Coordinating Board (2007, November). Strategic master plan for
higher education, pp. 21-26.
Washington Higher Education Coordinating Board, et al. (2005, December). A skilled and
educated workforce: An assessment of the number and type of higher education and
training credentials required to meet employer demand
Zumeta, W. (2007, Winter). The new accountability: The potential of performance compacts in
higher education. National Cross Talk, 12-13
..
Assessment System Requirement for Graduate Education Programs at Georgia Southern
TaskStream is an electronic assessment and management system chosen by Georgia Southern
University for the collection of performance assessment data for all College of Education
students. The TaskStream system is used to aggregate performance data, generate reports, and in
some cases manage electronic portfolios including both numerical data and electronic artifacts.
Recent state and national accreditation requirements for academic programs now make the use of
this type of electronic management and reporting system necessary for standards-based
accountability purposes at all levels.
Requirement: All Georgia Southern candidates in education programs are required to establish
and maintain an account with TaskStream while they are enrolled in education courses or hours
in order to fulfill the requirements of those courses and be retained within a program. An email
with necessary instructions for account establishment or renewal will be sent to each students
@GeorgiaSouthern.edu address. Students are responsible for ensuring that they establish an
account and that they sign in to the account after it has been established.

13

Cost: The cost for an account is currently being covered by the University. Account
establishment or renewal codes will be sent to each student via campus email,
@GeorgiaSouthern.edu.