Unformatted text preview:

COURSE SYLLABUS-DRAFTGraduate Seminar in Project Based Instruction: EDC 385GTime: Th 4-7PMPersonal InformationDr. Anthony Petrosino Email : [email protected] Professor Office: 512-471-1044 or 3747Sanchez Building, Room 462-A Fax : 512-471-8460 The University of Texas at Austin (h) 512-374-0891Austin, TX 78712 Office Hours: Tuesday 9AM-11AM and by appointmentCourse Number: EDC 385GCourse Name: Graduate Seminar in Project Based InstructionRoom Number: SZB 284. Unique Number: 08351Course DescriptionGraduate Seminar in Project Based InstructionCourse Overview There has been considerable emphasis in current reform documents concerning inquiry based activities. A number of strategies have arisen to address inquiry including case based instruction (Williams, 1992), problem based learning (Hmelo, 1998) and project based learning (Blumenfeld et al., 1991). This course will first address the differences between these approaches to inquiry, some historical roots to project-based instruction and finallywill attempt to explore the basic ideas and theoretical perspectives underlying project-based science instruction. Theoretical Perspective A major hurdle in implementing project-based curricula is that they require simultaneous changes in curriculum, instruction and assessment practices--changes that are often foreign to the students as well as the teachers (Barron et al., 1998). In this seminarwe will develop an approach to designing, implementing and evaluating problem- and project-based curricula that has emerged from collaboration with teachers and researchers. Previous research has identified four design principles that appear to be especially important: (1) Defining learning appropriate goals that lead to deep understanding; (2) Providing scaffolds such as beginning with problem-based learning activities before completing projects; using "embedded teaching", "teaching tools" and sets of "contrasting cases"; (3) Including multiple opportunities for formative self-assessment; (4) Developing social structures that promote participation and revision. We will first discuss these principles individually and then compare them to other design principles suggested by other groups involved with project-based instruction.Driving questions of the course:What are project-based science learning environments? What makes a good driving question? What can we realistically expect of students doing inquiry? How can technology support students do inquiry? What kind of scaffolds can teachers provide to support inquiry? What are all the tools in the Investigators' Workshop and what is the theory behind their design? How do you design a curriculum that has a project-based science structure? How can you promote professional development? What is the role of collaboration, enactment, reflection and adaptation in professional development?How do you create project-based science learning environments?Course Expectations:Prepare for and participate in class discussion and class work-time; Lead the class in a discussion of a set of articles; Course project: Develop a project that might include a research proposal, an extended literature review, a small research study, or the development of PBS curriculum. You will present your projects to the class as well as produce a detailed written report. Class AttendanceClass attendance is vital to the success of any graduate seminar. Regular attendance is expected with no more than 1 unexcused absence from class for the semester. Violation of the attendance policy may result in no credit for the course.Availability of CourseworkDeadlinesCourse MaterialsThursday September 2, 1999ReadingsKilpatrick, W. H. (1918). The project method. Teachers College Record. Vol. XIX, No.4.Krajcik, J., Blumenfeld, P.C., Marx, R.W., Bass, K.M., Fredricks, J. And Soloway, E. (1998). Inquiry in project-based science classrooms: initial attempts by middle school students. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 313-350.Thursday September 9, 1999Barron, B. J. S., Schwartz, D. L., Vye, N. J., Moore, A., Petrosino, A., Zech, L., Bransford, J. D.,and CTGV (1998). Doing with understanding: lessons from research on problem-and project-based learning. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 271-312.Coleman, E. B. (1998). Using explanatory knowledge during collaborative problem solving in science. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 7(3&4), 387-428.Thursday September 16, 1999Metz, K. E. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children’s science instruction. Review of Educational Research, Summer 1995, Vol. 65, No.2 (93-127).Kuhn, D. (1997). Constraints of guideposts? Developmental psychology and science education.Review of Educational Research Spring 1997, Vol. 67, No.1 (141-150).Metz K. E. (1997). On the complex relation between cognitive developmental research and children’s science curricula. Review of Educational Research. Spring 1997, Vol. 67, No.1 (151-163).Thursday September 23, 1999Brown, A. L., Campione, J. C., Metz, K. E., Ash, D. B. (In press). The development of science learning abilities in children. To appear in A. Burgen & K. Harnquist (Eds.), Growing up with science: Developing early understanding of science.Thursday September 30, 1999o Model-based reasoning (Part 1). Taking science learning as the prototypical case, instruction aims to help students play the "modeling game." Mathematicians play this game too. Hunt, E., & Minstrell, J. (1994). A cognitive approach to the teaching of physics. In K. McGilly (ed.), Classroom lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice. (pp. 51-74). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Hancock, C., Kaput, J.J., & Goldsmith, L.T. (1992). Authentic inquiry with data: Critical barriers to classroom implementation. Educational Psychologist, 27, 317-364.Thursday October 7, 1999o Teaching and Learning as Assisted Performance. The sociocultural perspective on teaching andlearning places its emphasis on the organization or culture of assisted perormance. What forms of assistance are available? Tharp, R.G., & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life. New York: Cambridge University Press. (pp.1-111).Zuckerman, G.A., Chudinova, E. V., & Khavkin, E.E. (1998). Inquiry as a pivotal element of knowledge acquisition within the Vygotskian paradigm: Building a science curriculum for the elementary school. Cognition and Instruction, 16, 201-233.Thursday October 14, 1999o Mind Tools. The socioculural


View Full Document

UT EDC 385G - EDC 385G Syllabus

Documents in this Course
Load more
Download EDC 385G Syllabus
Our administrator received your request to download this document. We will send you the file to your email shortly.
Loading Unlocking...
Login

Join to view EDC 385G Syllabus and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or
We will never post anything without your permission.
Don't have an account?
Sign Up

Join to view EDC 385G Syllabus 2 2 and access 3M+ class-specific study document.

or

By creating an account you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms Of Use

Already a member?