Department of Administrative and Policy Studies
John C. Weidman, PhD, Professor of Higher and
International Development Education / 5910 Wesley W. Posvar Hall
230 South Bouquet Street
Pittsburgh, PA 15260
Phone: 412-648-1772
Email:
ADMPS 3301: Social Theories and Education in Global Context
Instructor’s Homepage:
http://www.education.pitt.edu/people/profile.aspx?f=JohnWeidman
Google Scholar Publications Profile:
http://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=AV29yF0AAAAJ
ResearchGate Profile:
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/John_Weidman
Term: Fall, 2015 (2161); Wednesday, 4:30-7:10 pm, 4317 WWPH
Office Hours: Wednesday and Thursday, 2-4; also by appointment.
CATALOG DESCRIPTION:
Students will explore a range of social theories that may be helpful in informing how they understand and operate in educational institutions in local, national, and global economic, political, and cultural contexts. By examining and comparing a variety of theories and contexts, students will be encouraged to develop/refine their own theories of a) how and why society and education are organized as they are; b) how and why education and/or society have or have not changed; and c) how and why education and/or society should be changed.
PURPOSE OF THE COURSE:
The purpose of this course is to introduce students to theoretical perspectives that have been applied to the study of social and educational change in comparative and international context. It addresses the relationships among different theories as well as the linkages among particular theoretical perspectives and methodological approaches. Key organizing principles are drawn from the work of Rolland G. Paulston, a former professor at the University of Pittsburgh and past president of the Comparative and International Education Society (CIES), on social cartography. Students are encouraged to explore theories from a variety of national and international sources. Those seeking credit for University Center for International Studies (UCIS) programs must focus their term papers on a country or region in the particular program’s geographical area.
REQUIREMENTS AND GRADING:
1. Reading and Class Participation: Seminar participants are expected to carefully read all assigned readings identified for a particular class session as well as actively and productively participate in class discussions. Come to class prepared to pose questions and offer comments that will facilitate your and others’ deeper reflection on the issues raised in the readings and the implications these have for policy analysis.
2. Weighting of Class Participation and Written Assignments in Final Grade:
a. First Written Assignment. Proposal (3-5 pages) (15%)
b. Class Participation including Presentation of Supplement Reading and Leading Discussion (15%)
c. Final Paper Providing the Conceptual Framework for a Research Topic (25-30 pages) (45%)
d. PowerPoint Presentation of Final Paper (25%)
DISABILITY SERVICES
If you have a disability that requires special testing accommodations or other classroom modifications, you need to notify both the instructor and Disability Resources and Services no later than the second week of the term. You may be asked to provide documentation of your disability to determine the appropriateness of accommodations. To notify Disability Resources and Services, call (412) 648-7890 (Voice or TTD) to schedule an appointment. The Disability Resources and Services office is located in 140 William Pitt Union on the Oakland campus.
STATEMENT ON CLASSROOM RECORDING
To ensure the free and open discussion of ideas, students may not record classroom lectures, discussion and/or activities without the advance written permission of the instructor, and any such recording properly approved in advance can be used solely for the student’s own private use.
ACADEMIC INTEGRITY
Students in this course will be expected to comply with the University of Pittsburgh's Policy on Academic Integrity. Any student suspected of violating this obligation for any reason during the semester will be required to participate in the procedural process, initiated at the instructor level, as outlined in the University Guidelines on Academic Integrity. This may include, but is not limited to, the confiscation of the examination of any individual suspected of violating University Policy. Furthermore, no student may bring any unauthorized materials to an exam, including dictionaries and programmable calculators.
UNIVERSITY OF PITTSBURGH
Academic Integrity Guidelines
Student Agreement
I. Student Obligations
A student has an obligation to exhibit honesty and to respect the ethical standards of the profession in carrying out his or her academic assignments. Without limiting the application of this principle, a student may be found to have violated this obligation if he or she:
1. Refers during an academic evaluation to materials or sources, or employs devices, not authorized by the faculty member.
2. Provides assistance during an academic evaluation to another person in a manner not authorized by the faculty member.
3. Receives assistance during an academic evaluation from another person in a manner not authorized by the faculty member.
4. Engages in unauthorized possession, buying, selling, obtaining, or use of any materials intended to be used as an instrument of academic evaluation in advance of its administration.
5. Acts as a substitute for another person in any academic evaluation process.
6. Utilizes a substitute in any academic evaluation proceeding.
7. Practices any form of deceit in an academic evaluation proceeding.
8. Depends on the aid of others in a manner expressly prohibited by the faculty member, in the research, preparation, creation, writing, performing, or publication of work to be submitted for academic credit or evaluation.
9. Provides aid to another person, knowing such aid is expressly prohibited by the instructor, in the research, preparation, creation, writing, performing, or publication of work to be submitted for academic credit or evaluation.
10. Presents as one’s own, for academic evaluation, the ideas, representations, or words of another person or persons without customary and proper acknowledgment of sources.
11. Submits the work of another person in a manner which represents the work to be one's own.
12. Knowingly permits one's work to be submitted by another person without the faculty member's authorization.
13. Attempts to influence or change one's academic evaluation or record for reasons other than achievement or merit.
14. Indulges, during a class (or examination) session in which one is a student, in conduct which is so disruptive as to infringe upon the rights of the faculty member or fellow students.
15. Fails to cooperate, if called upon, in the investigation or disposition of any allegation of dishonesty pertaining to another student.
16. Violates the canons of ethics of the student's professional discipline, as promulgated by professional organizations and/ or regulatory bodies (e.g., American College of Sports Medicine, American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, and Pennsylvania Department of Education).
The alternative sanctions which may be imposed upon a finding that an offense related to academic integrity has been committed are the following:
1. Dismissal from the University without expectation of readmission.
2. Suspension from the University for a specific period of time.
3. Reduction in grade, or assignment of a failing grade, in the course in which the offending paper or examination was submitted.
4. Reduction in grade, or assignment of a failing grade, on the paper or examination in which the offense occurred.
I have read and agree to follow these academic integrity guidelines.
Signed:______Date:______
Printed Name:______
DEPARTMENTAL GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES
The purpose of grievance procedures is to ensure the rights and responsibilities of faculty and students in their relationships with each other. When a student in ADMPS believes that a faculty member has not met his or her obligations (as an instructor or in another capacity) as described in the Academic Integrity Guidelines, the student should follow the procedure described in the Guidelines by (1) first trying to resolve the matter with the faculty member directly; (2) then, if needed, attempting to resolve the matter through conversations with the chair/associate chair of the department; (3) if needed, next talking to the associate dean of the school; and (4) if needed, filing a written statement of charges with the school-level academic integrity officer. [Dr. Michael Gunzenhauser is the Associate Dean and Integrity Officer.]
REQUIRED READINGS (AVAILABLE ON COURSEWEB):
Babones, Salvatore. (2015). What is world-systems analysis? Distinguishing theory from perspective. Thesis Eleven, 127(1), 3–20.
Baily, Supriya. (2011). Trajectories of influence. In John C. Weidman & W. James Jacob (Eds.), Beyond the comparative: Advancing theory and its application to practice (pp. 217–233). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Bourdieu, Pierre. (1986). The forms of capital. Pp. 241-258 in John G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of theory and research for the sociology of education. New York: Greenwood Press. Originally published as Ökonomisches Kapital, kulturelles Kapital, soziales Kapital, in Soziale Ungleichheiten (Soziale Welt, Sonderheft 2), edited by Reinhard Kreckel. Göttingen: Otto Schartz & Co., 1983, pp. 183-98. The article appears here for first time in English, translated by Richard Nice.
Cheng, Sheng Y., Jacob, W. James, & Chen, Pochang. (2011). Metatheory in comparative, international, and development education. In John C. Weidman & W. James Jacob (Eds.), Beyond the comparative: Advancing theory and its application to practice (pp. 295–314). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Clayton, Thomas (1998). Beyond mystification: Reconnecting world-system theory for comparative education. Comparative Education Review, 42(4), 479-496.
Coleman, James S. (1988). Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology, 94 (Supplement), S95-S120.
Collins, Randall (1971). Functional and conflict theories of educational stratification. American Sociological Review, 36 (No. 6, December), 1002-1019.
Coradini, Odaci Luiz. (2010). The divergences between Bourdieu’s and Coleman’s notions of social capital and their epistemological limits. Social Science Information, 49(4): 563–583.
Diffendal, Enkhjargal A. & Weidman, John C. (2011). Gender equity in access to higher education in Mongolia. In John C. Weidman & W. James Jacob (Eds.), Beyond the comparative: Advancing theory and its application to practice (pp. 333–353). Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Edgerton, Jason D. & Roberts, Lance W. (2014). Cultural capital or habitus? Bourdieu and beyond in the explanation of enduring educational inequality. Theory and Research in Education, 12(2), 193–220.
Elliott, Anthony & Lemert, Charles. (2014a). The contemporary relevance of the classics. Pp. 17-39 in Introduction to contemporary social theory. Florence, KY: Taylor and Francis.
Elliott, Anthony & Lemert, Charles. (2014b). Structures, functions and culture. Pp. 133-152 in Introduction to contemporary social theory. Florence, KY: Taylor and Francis.
Hasse, Raymond & Krücken, Georg. (2014). Decoupling and coupling in education. Pp. 197-214 in Holzer, Boris, Kastner, Fatima, & Werron, Tobias (Eds.), From globalization to world society: Neo-institutional and systems-theoretical perspectives. Florence, KY: Routledge.
Holmarsdottir, Halla B. (2011). Mapping the dialectic between global and local educational discourses on gender equality and equity. In John C. Weidman & W. James Jacob (Eds.), Beyond the comparative: Advancing theory and its application to practice (pp. 193–215). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Jacob, W. James, Crandall, Jennifer R., & Hilton, Jason. (2011). Emerging theories in comparative, international, and development education. In John C. Weidman & W. James Jacob (Eds.), Beyond the comparative: Advancing theory and its application to practice (pp. 69–91). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Lee, Raymond LM. (2013). Modernity, modernities and modernization: Tradition reappraised. Social Science Information, 52(3), 409–424.
Manzon, M. (2011a). Intellectual histories of comparative education. In Comparative education: The construction of a field (pp. 127–152). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media B.V.
Manzon, M. (2011b). References and Index. In Comparative education: The construction of a field (pp. 231–295). Dordrecht, Netherlands: Springer Science & Business Media B.V.
Paulston, Rolland G. (1977). Social and educational change: Conceptual frameworks. Comparative Education Review, 21(2/3), 370–395.
Paulston, Ralland G. (1990). Essay review: Toward a reflective comparative education? Comparative Education Review, 34(2), 248–255.
Paulston, Rolland G. (1993). Mapping discourse in comparative education texts. Compare, 23(2), 101–114.
Paulston, Rolland G. (1997). Mapping visual culture in comparative education discourse. Compare, 27(2), 117–152.
Paulston, Rolland G. (1999). Mapping comparative education after postmodernity. Comparative Education Review, 43(4), 438–463.
Paulston, Rolland G. (2000a). A spatial turn in comparative education? Constructing a social cartography of difference. In J. Schriewer (Ed.), Discourse formation in comparative education (pp. 297–354). Berlin: Peter Lang.
Paulston, Rolland G. (2000b). Imagining comparative education: Past, present, future. Compare, 30(3), 353–367.
Paulston, Rolland G., & Liebman, Martin. (1994). An invitation to postmodern social cartography. Comparative Education Review, 38(2), 215–232.
Phillips, David. (2009). Aspects of educational transfer. In R. Cowen & A. M. Kazamias (Eds.), International handbook of comparative education (pp. 1061–1077). Dordrecht: Springer.
Phillips, David, & Ochs, Kimberly. (2003). Processes of policy borrowing in education: Some explanatory and analytical devices. Comparative Education, 39(4), 451–461.
Phillips, David, & Ochs, Kimberly. (2004). Researching policy borrowing: Some methodological challenges in comparative education. British Educational Research Journal, 30(6), 773–784.
Robbins, Derek. (2005). The origins, early development and status of Bourdieu’s concept of ‘cultural capital.’ British Journal of Sociology, 56(1), 13-30.
Rust, Val D. (1991). Presidential address: Postmodernism and Its comparative education implications. Comparative Education Review, 35(4), 610–626.
Rust, Val D. & Kenderes, Amanda. (2011). Paulston and paradigms. In J. C. Weidman & W. J. Jacob (Eds.), Beyond the comparative: Advancing theory and its application to practice (pp. 19–29). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Sallaz, Jeffrey J. & Zavisca, Jane. (2007). Bourdieu in American sociology, 1980-2004. Annual Review of Sociology, 33, 21-30, C1-C3, 31-41.
Schmidt, Volker H. (2010). Modernity and diversity: reflections on the controversy between modernization theory and multiple modernists. Social Science Information, 49(4): 511–538.
Stichweh, Rudolf. (2014). Comparing systems theory and sociological neo-institutionalism: Explaining functional differentiation. Pp. 23-36 in Holzer, Boris, Kastner, Fatima, & Werron, Tobias (Eds.), From globalization to world society: Neo-institutional and systems-theoretical perspectives. Florence, KY: Routledge.
Stromquist, Nelly P. (2011). A social cartography of gender. In John C. Weidman & W. James Jacob (Eds.), Beyond the comparative: Advancing theory and its application to practice (pp. 173–192). Rotterdam, Netherlands: Sense Publishers.