COURSE SYLLABUS – ED 671 Issues in Education

Teacher Leadership

CREDIT HOURS: 2 Semester Credits

CLASS TIME: TBD
INSTRUCTOR: Dr. Mike Coquyt, Ed.D.
OFFICE: 216C Lommen Hall, MSUM
EMAIL: michael.coquyt@mnstate.edu
OFFICE PHONE: (218) 477-2019

Course Description

This course examines current and emerging issues and trends impacting education: inquiring into demographic
shifts; globalization; technology, data-based decision-making; inclusion of diverse learners in American
schools; and recent research on student achievement when influenced by race, gender, and poverty.

Student Outcomes

Participants will:

• Be able to explain several of the seismic shifts and major trends and their implications for society at
large and schools and school districts in particular.
• Demonstrate an understanding of the history of diverse groups in the United States and review education
in the United States in reference to diverse groups as well as the privileges or inequities that members of
these groups have encountered on the basis of race, ethnicity, and social class.
• Articulate how student diversity can help teachers and administrators develop curriculum that includes
global literacy with a significant effect on economic, cultural, and political matters, with particular
attention on how culture influences learning.
• Be able to explain the definitions and characteristics of children with special learning needs, i.e.,
learning disabilities, behavioral disorders, visual and hearing impairment, ADHD, and giftedness.
• Describe the educational rights of individuals with disabilities including the legal foundations, models of
service delivery, and the concepts of mainstreaming and inclusion.
• Describe ways in which special educators and regular educators can partner with regard to shared goals,
collaboration, referrals, and placements.
• Be able to articulate effective knowledge management strategies that use technology to enhance
administration, teaching, and learning at the school and district levels.
• Be able to synthesize recent research relative to student achievement in diverse school settings, with
particular attention to the relationships between student achievement and gender, race, and poverty.
• Identify various strategies to maximize the effective use of data to improve student achievement and
effective ways to communicate results to various community groups.
• Demonstrate the ability to make educational decisions which are supported by data rather than only on
personal opinions.
Performance Outcomes

This course is organized to improve teacher instructional effectiveness using several intended outcomes. This
course is aligned to the Teacher Leader Model Standards (TLMS). The Teacher Leader Model Standards are
intended to codify, promote, and support teacher leadership as a vehicle for transforming schools to meet the
needs of 21st-century learners. Rather than serve as a comprehensive job description for teacher leaders, the
Standards instead describe seven domains of leadership. Each domain is further developed and supported by a
list of functions that a teacher leader who is an expert in that domain might perform.

It is expected that acceptable performance on all of the organized course activities will lead to satisfaction of the
following:

Domain 1: Fostering a Collaborative Culture to Support Educator Development and Student Learning

d) Strives to create an inclusive culture where diverse perspectives are welcomed in addressing challenges; and

e) Uses knowledge and understanding of different backgrounds, ethnicities, cultures, and languages to promote effective
interactions among colleagues.

Domain 2: Accessing and Using Research to Improve Practice and Student Learning

c) Supports colleagues in collaborating with the higher education institutions and other organizations engaged in
researching critical educational issues; and

Domain 3: Promoting Professional Learning for Continuous Improvement

b) Uses information about adult learning to respond to the diverse learning needs of colleagues by identifying, promoting,
and facilitating varied and differentiated professional learning;

Domain 4: Facilitating Improvements in Instruction and Student Learning

f) Promotes instructional strategies that address issues of diversity and equity in the classroom and ensures that individual
student learning needs remain the central focus of instruction.

Domain 6: Improving Outreach and Collaboration with Families and Community

c) Facilitates colleagues’ self-examination of their own understandings of community culture and diversity and how they
can develop culturally responsive strategies to enrich the educational experiences of students and achieve high levels of
learning for all students;
d) Develops a shared understanding among colleagues of the diverse educational needs of families and the community;

Domain 7: Advocating for Student Learning and the Profession

a) Shares information with colleagues within and/or beyond the district regarding how local, state, and national trends and
policies can impact classroom practices and expectations for student learning;

b) Works with colleagues to identify and use research to advocate for teaching and learning processes that meet the needs
of all students;

c) Collaborates with colleagues to select appropriate opportunities to advocate for the rights and/or needs of students, to
secure additional resources within the building or district that support student learning, and to communicate effectively
with targeted audiences such as parents and community members;

EVALUATION AND GRADING

Assignment #1 – Written Essay – Contemporary Topics in Education

Students will select an issue that is of high interest to them and write an essay (3 to 5 pages) which a) shows
evidence of reading and thought on the topic; b) connects to research/thought/ examples in practice; and c)
which analyses the prevailing issue(s) and presents at least 3 recommendations as possible solutions.

25% of Final Grade

Possible Topics:

Instructional Coaching
Teacher Pay
Graduation Rates
Teacher Assignments
Gender Equity
Class Size
Gifted Programs
High School Reform
Disabilities Grouping and Tracking
Standards
Standardization vs. Variation
Assessment
Retention and Promotion
Low Performance in Urban Areas
Centralization vs. Decentralization
Low Performance in Rural Areas
Charter Schools
AYP as defined by NCLB
School Choice and Vouchers
Teacher Education
Privatization
Teacher Quality
Home Schooling
Pre – Education Evolution
Sex Education
Zero Tolerance
Religious Expression
Role of Scientific Research in School Reform
Effective Practices
Comprehensive School Reform
*Any topic in consultation with the instructor

TLMS Standards Assessed: 1D, 1E, 2C, 3B, 4F, 6C, 6D, 7A, 7B, 7C
CF (Reflective, Humanistic, Creative, and Knowledgeable)

Assignment #2 – Consultant presentation

The school board has created a planning group to advise it on issues which may impact the district in the future.
Students will work with a partner as Futurist Consultants. They will present information to the School Board
Planning Group (the rest of the class) on an assigned topic decided upon by the class. In order to prepare the
Planning Group for the presentation each pair will locate and assign readings to be completed by the class prior
to the presentation. Remember- the school district is paying big bucks for your consulting services. The
presentation should be worth it.

25% of Final Grade

TLMS Standards Assessed: 1D, 1E, 2C, 3B, 4F, 6C, 6D, 7A, 7B, 7C
CF (Reflective, Humanistic, Creative, and Knowledgeable)

Assignment #3 – Major Trends in Education

Student groups will present information on the major trends affecting education in the immediate future.
Presentations are of the students design and should incorporate the use of technology. A power point is not
required! Utilization of outside sources is expected and at least one journal article for each member of the class
will be handed out the class meeting before the presentation so everyone has some background knowledge. 20
to 30 minutes will be allocated in class for presentations.

The topics of choice for this assignment may include, but are not limited to:

Teacher Leadership

Anderson, J. (2013, March 30). Curious grade for teachers: Nearly all pass. The New York Times.
Retrieved from www.nytimes.com/2013/03/31/education/curious-grade-for-teachers-nearly-all-pass.html

Bambrick-Santoyo, P. (2012). Leverage leadership: A practical guide to building exceptional schools.

San Francisco: Wiley.

Barth, R. (2001). Teacher leader. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(6), 443–449.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (2006). Troubling images of teaching in No Child Left Behind. Harvard
Educational Review, 76, 668–697.

Collay, M. (2011, June 16). Everyday teacher leadership: Taking action where you are. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.

Collay, M., Dunlap, D., Enloe, W., & Gagnon, G. (1998). Learning circles: Creating conditions for
teacher professional development. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
 Cuban, L. (2011). Jazz, basketball, and teacher decision-making [blog post] Retrieved from Larry Cuban
on School Reform and Classroom Practice at http://larrycuban.wordpress.com/2011/06/16/jazz-
basketball-and-teacher-decision-making

Danielson, C. (2002). Enhancing student achievement: A framework for school improvement. Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.

Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher leadership that strengthens professional practice. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Donaldson, G. (2007). What do teachers bring to leadership? Educational Leadership, 65(1), 26–29.

Gergen, K. (2009). Relational being: Beyond self and community. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Keyes, C. (2000). Parent-teacher partnerships: A theoretical approach for teachers. Issues in early
childhood education: Curriculum, teaching education, and dissemination of information (Proceedings of
the Lilian Katz Symposium, Champaign, Illinois). Retrieved from
http://ecap/crc/illinois.edu/pubs/katzsym/keyes.pdf

Marzano, R. J., Frontier, T., & Livingston, D. (2011). Effective supervision: Supporting the art and
science of teaching. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Miretsky, D. (2004). The communication requirements of democratic schools: Parent-teacher perspectives

on their relationships. Teachers College Record, 106, 814–851.

Teacher Leadership (Best Practices/Research)

My Teaching Partner–Secondary—a Web-mediated approach focused on improving teacher-student

interactions in the classroom: Allen, J., Pianta, R., Gregory, A., Mikami, A., & Lun, J. (2011). An
interaction-based approach to enhancing secondary school instruction and student achievement. Science,
333 (6045), 1034–1037.

Gradual Increase of Responsibility Model: Collett, V. S. (2012). The gradual increase of responsibility
model: Coaching for teacher change. Literacy Research and Instruction, 51(1) 27–47.

Scaffolded Coaching Model/ K-PAVE Program: Goodson, B., Wolf, A., Bell, S., Turner, H., & Finney, P.
B. (2010). The effectiveness of a program to accelerate vocabulary development in kindergarten
(VOCAB). (NCEE 2010-4014). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional
Assistance. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/edlabs/regions/southeast/pdf/REL_20104014.pdf

Goodwin, B. (2011). Implementation counts. Educational Leadership, 69(2), 82–83.

Shared Leadership Model : Hallinger, P., & Heck, R. (2010). Collaborative leadership and school
improvement: Understanding the impact on school capacity and student learning. School Leadership and
Management, 30(2), 95–110.

Hanna, D. (2010). How GM destroyed its Saturn success. Forbes. Retrieved from
www.forbes.com/2010/03/08/saturn-gm-innovation-leadership-managing-failure.html

Hart, A. W. (1994). Creating teacher leadership roles. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30(4) 472–
497.

Joyce, B., & Showers, B. (2002). Student achievement through staff development (3rd ed.). Alexandria,
VA: ASCD.
 Shared Leadership Model: Leithwood, K., & Mascall, B. (2008). Collective leadership effects on student
achievement. Educational Administration Quarterly, 44(4), 529–561.

Murray, S., Ma, X., & Mazur, J. (2009). Effects of peer coaching on teachers' collaborative interactions
and students' mathematics achievement. Journal of Educational Research, 103(2) 203–212.

Shifting the Culture of Schools: Teacher Leadership Exploratory Consortium. (2011). Teacher leader
model standards. Carrboro, NC: Author. Retrieved from
www.teacherleaderstandards.org/downloads/TLS_Brochure.pdf

School Culture Impedes Teacher Leadership & Characteristics of Teacher Leaders: York-Barr, J., &
Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship.
Review of Educational Research, 74(3), 255–316.

Peer Assistance and Review (PAR)

Accomplished California Teachers (ACT). (2010). A quality teacher in every classroom: Creating a
teacher evaluation system that works for California. Stanford, CA: National Board Resource Center,
Stanford University.

California State University Institute for Education Reform. (2000, March). Peer assistance and review:
Working models across the country. Sacramento, CA: Author.

Project on the Next Generation of Teachers. (n.d.). A user's guide to peer assistance and review.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard Graduate School of Education. Retrieved from www.gse.harvard.edu/~ngt/par

Humphrey, D., Koppich, J., Bland, A., & Bosetti, K. R. (2011). Peer review: Getting serious about
teacher evaluation. Menlo Park, CA: SRI International.

Marshall, R. (2008). The case for collaborative school reform: The Toledo experience. Washington, DC:
Economic Policy Institute.

National Commission on Teaching and America's Future. (1996). What matters most: Teaching for
America's future. New York: Author.

Finland

Clotfelter, C. T., Ladd, H. F., & Vigdor, J. L. (2007). Teacher credentials and student achievement:
Longitudinal analysis with student fixed effects. Economics of Education Review, 26(6), 673–682.

EPSI. (2012). Employee satisfaction in Finland. Helsinki: Author. Retrieved from www.epsi-finland.org

Hargreaves, A., & Shirley, D. (2011). The global fourth way: The quest for educational excellence.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Sahlberg, P. (2011). Finnish lessons: What can the world learn from educational change in Finland? New
York: Teachers College Press.

Sahlberg, P. (2013, May 15). What if Finland's great teachers taught in U.S. schools? Washington Post.
Retrieved from www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/answer-sheet/wp/2013/05/15/what-if-finlands-great-
teachers-taught-in-u-s-schools-not-what-you-think

Motivate to Lead
 Coggins, C. (2010). Holding on to generation Y. Educational Leadership, 67(8), 70–74.

Coggins, C., & Peske, H. (2011, January 18). New teachers are the new majority. Education Week.
Retrieved from www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2011/01/19/17coggins.h30.html

Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The story of success. New York: Little, Brown.

Ingersoll, R., & Merrill, L. (2012, April). Seven trends: The transformation of the teaching force. Paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Vancouver, Canada.

Johnson, S. M. (2004). Finders and keepers: Helping new teachers survive and thrive in our schools.
Indianapolis, IN: Jossey-Bass.

Johnson, S. M., Berg, J. H., & Donaldson, M. L. (2005). Who stays in teaching and why: A review of the
literature on teacher retention. Washington, DC: AARP. Retrieved from
http://assets.aarp.org/www.aarp.org_/articles/NRTA/Harvard_report.pdf

Lortie, D. C. (1975). Schoolteacher: A sociological study. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2008). Schools and staffing survey. Washington, DC: Author.
Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/surveys/sass/tables/sass0708_011_t12n_02.asp

Pink, D. (2009). Drive: The surprising truth about what motivates us. New York: Riverhead.

Teoh, M., & Coggins, C. (2013). Great expectations: Teachers' views on elevating the profession. Boston:
Teach Plus. Retrieved from
www.teachplus.org/uploads/Documents/1350917768_Teach%20Plus%20Great%20Expectations.pdf

TNTP. (2012). The irreplaceables: Understanding the real retention crisis in America's urban schools.
New York: Author. Retrieved from http://tntp.org/assets/documents/TNTP_Irreplaceables_2012.pdf

Teacher Led Schools

Farris-Berg, K., & Dirkswager, E. (2012). Trusting teachers with school success: What happens when
teachers call the shots. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Education.

Frankl, V. (1959). Man's search for meaning. Boston: Beacon.

MetLife. (2013). MetLife survey of the American teacher: Challenges for school leadership. New York:
Author. Retrieved from www.metlife.com/assets/cao/foundation/MetLife-Teacher-Survey-2012.pdf

Wheatley, M. (2006). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world. San
Francisco: Barrett-Kohle.

Shared Leadership

DuFour, R., DuFour, R., Eaker, R., & Many, T. (2010). Learning by doing: A handbook for professional
learning communities at work (2nd ed.). Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.

Marzano, R., Waters, T., & McNulty, B. (2005). School leadership that works: From research to results.
Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Waters, T., Cameron, G., Melver, M., Eck, J., Kearns, J., Seebaum, M., et al. (2009). Balanced
leadership: School level leadership—An overview (facilitators' manual). Denver, CO: Mid-Continent
Research for Education and Learning (McREL).
25% of Final Grade

TLMS Standards Assessed: 1D, 1E, 2C, 3B, 4F, 6C, 6D, 7A, 7B, 7C
CF (Reflective, Humanistic, Creative, and Knowledgeable)

Assignment #4 – Class participation

Class participation in Voicethread and other synchronous class meetings is expected

25% of Final Grade

TLMS Standards Assessed: 1E, 2C, 4F, 6C, 6D, 7A, 7B, 7C
CF (Reflective, Knowledgeable)

Evaluation

Your grade for the course will be calculated based on the total points that you have accumulated as the
percentage of possible points.

A = 94-100, A- = 90-93.9, B+ = 87-89.9, B = 84-86.9, B- = 80-83.9, C+ = 77-79.9, C = 74-76.9, C- = 70-73.9,

D+ = 67-69.9, D = 64-66.9, D- = 60-63.9, F = 59.9 and below

Professional Ethics

Work in this course must be completed in a manner consistent with the Minnesota State University Student
Academic Honesty policy which can be found in the student handbook published on the web. Steps that might
be taken are described along with the student appeal process.

Special Accommodations

A student with a disability or other special needs and who requires special accommodations for success in this
course is invited to share those concerns or requests with the instructor as soon as possible. Students with
disabilities who believe they may need an accommodation in this class are encouraged to contact Greg Toutges,
Coordinator of Disability Services at 477-5859 (Voice) or 1-800-627-3529 (MRS/TTY), CMU 114 as soon as
possible to ensure that accommodations are implemented in a timely fashion.

Text

There is no text for this class

Reasoned Action Leadership

This course is organized to achieve several intended outcomes. The organization employed therein follows the
Reasoned Action Leadership model of development. This model is based upon current knowledge of teaching
and learning, and on the research on administration and leadership founding the National Policy board
Standards for Educational Administration programs.
In the Reasoned Action leadership model, the research on and our knowledge of the activities and principles of
teaching surround all other components of the school leadership process. This portion of the knowledge base
then serves as a conceptual framework for those aspects of education, which deal most specifically with school
leadership. In this manner – with the principles of teaching encompassing the principles of administration – the
interdependence of teachers and administrators is given recognition and reinforcement.