Admps 3003
APS PhD Seminar
Syllabus and Description of Assignments
Fall 2014
Wednesdays, 1:00-3:40 pm
4321 Posvar Hall
CLS: 27372
A. Overview
Updated course description
The APS PhD Seminar is designed for students to explore the meaning and expectations of PhD study in the Department of Administrative and Policy Studies. This course includes texts collaboratively selected by department faculty. The seminar introduces students to theory and ideas that cut across the education sector (both formal and informal, PK-12 and higher education). It addresses topics of concern that span from preschool through higher education and non-formal education. The emphasis will be on transitioning to doctoral study through engagement in scholarly community and critical reading, writing, and thinking.
Contact information
Mike Gunzenhauser, PhD
Associate Professor of Administrative and Policy Studies
Associate Dean for Student Affairs, School of Education
University of Pittsburgh
5912 Posvar Hall (through mid-September), moving to 5610 Posvar Hall
230 S. Bouquet St., Pittsburgh PA 15260
Office: (412) 648-2119,
Home: (412) 244-6335 (before 9 pm)
Office hours by arrangement: Mon, Tue, Thurs, 1-5 pm (please suggest a specific time)
Open office hour: Wed, 12-1 pm
Course website: http://courseweb.pitt.edu/
Course texts
Required texts available for purchase at the University Store, with one exception (and to be read in this order):
Bell, Derrick (2004). Silent covenants: Brown v. Board of Education and the unfulfilled hopes for racial reform. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press. info
Gutmann, Amy (1987). Democratic education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. [used copies available inexpensively] info
Becker, Howard (1986). Writing for social scientists: How to start and finish your thesis, book, or article. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. info
Hanushek, Eric, Paul Peterson, & Ludger Woessmann (2013). Endangering prosperity: A global view of the American school. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. info
Mullen, Ann (2010). Degrees of inequality: Culture, class, and gender in American higher education. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press. info
Foucault, Michel (1995). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison (trans., Alan Sheridan). New York, NY: Vintage Books. (Original work published 1975) info
Blacker, David J. (2013). The falling rate of learning and the neoliberal endgame. Winchester, UK: Zero Books. info
Additional required readings
These readings are posted on Courseweb (and also to be read in this order):
Gunzenhauser, M.G., & Gerstl-Pepin, C.I. (2006). Engaging graduate education: A pedagogy for epistemological and theoretical diversity. Review of Higher Education, 29(3), 319-346.
Piantanida, M. & Garman, N. (1999). The qualitative dissertation: A guide for students and faculty. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press. [Excerpt: “What do we mean by deliberation?”]
Gunzenhauser, M.G. (2008). Citing by side-swiping: Engaging text in scholarly writing. Unpublished think piece. Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh.
Garcia, Gina A., Marc P. Johnston, Juan C. Garibay, Felisha A. Herrera, & Luis G. Giraldo (2011). When parties become racialized: Deconstructing racially themed parties. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 48(1), 5-21.
McClure, Maureen W. (in press). MOOCs, wicked problems and the spirit of the liberal arts. Journal of General Education.
Kelly, Sean P. & Richard Majerus (2011). School-to-school variation in disciplined inquiry. Urban Education, 46(6), 1553-1583.
Recommended resource readings
American Psychological Association (APA). (2009). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association, 6th ed. Washington, DC: Author. [ISBN 978-1-4338-0561-5]. Spiral bound recommended for ease of use: [ISBN 978-1-4338-0562-2]
Booth, Wayne C., Gregory G. Colomb, & Joseph M. Williams (2008). The craft of research, 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [ISBN 978-0-2260-6566-3] 17.00/10.05
Foss, Sonja, & William Waters (2007). Destination dissertation: A traveler’s guide to a done dissertation. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield. [ISBN: 978-0-7425-5440-5] 28.95/20.44
Richardson, L. (1990). Writing strategies: Reaching diverse audiences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications [ISBN 978-0-8039-3522-8] 26.00/22.93
Strunk, William, & E.B. White (2000). The elements of style, 4th ed. New York: Longman Press. [ISBN 978-0-2053-1342-6] 15.95/8.58
Assignments
1. Self-assessment on writing and scholar/practitioner/citizen role
2. Action plan for the year on the scholar/practitioner/citizen role
3. Essays for each course theme
4. Peer review of writing
5. Development of a doctoral plan of studies
6. Choice of articles and co-leading class discussion
7. Group project
B. Goals and Rationale
The APS PhD Seminar is the first iteration of the departmental core under the new PhD program design (it appears on your schedule and transcript as APS Doctoral Core I). You will all be taking several classes together this semester, including Intro to Quant and the First-Year Seminar. You will also all take Intro to Qual and Disciplined Inquiry in the Spring. So, you are going to get to know each other well. A committee consisting of several faculty members in the department advised me on the structure, assignments and readings for this course.
Throughout your first year, you’ll be building toward your preliminary exam – a research proposal for a project that you’ll enact in your second year. In this course, you will developing and fine-tuning your capacities and inclinations for original scholarship. To serve that overarching purpose, we have the following goals:
1. Practicing the SCHOLAR/PRACTITIONER/CITIZEN role as it relates to each individual’s unique context and experience.
The PhD Seminar provides a place to craft a professional identity around the multiple demands of the roles of the scholar/practitioner/citizen. As scholars, students engage with texts, the instructor, and each other in a deliberative community of inquiry. As practitioners, students further their habits of socially reflective action, where professional commitments are enacted and new practices created. As citizens, students take responsibility for themselves as actors in the work place, at home, and in the local, national and global communities in which they work and live.
2. Developing HABITS OF DELIBERATION as the centerpiece for adult learning in the doctoral program.
A major reason for success in the doctoral program is the student’s ability to engage in deliberative processes. (See Piantanida & Garman, “What Do We Mean By Deliberation?”) In this seminar, we will develop habits of deliberation through in-class interaction around course material and outside-class interaction around each other’s writing. Students are expected to develop their strategies for giving and soliciting critiques. They can also get valuable commentaries concerning their work from faculty, students and interested others. It means, however, that they must plan for several drafts (or iterations) in their thinking and writing.
3. THINKING, READING, AND WRITING CRITICALLY, which includes:
· reflection;
· awareness of and understanding multiple perspectives;
· uncovering (unpacking) tacit assumptions;
· developing and articulating positions with logical consistency;
· situating one’s ideas by using appropriate formal discourses and citation style; and
· engaging in the discourses in one’s field through scholarship and practice (generating knowledge as a responsibility for doctoral work).
Students are expected to develop their capacities and habits for reflective thinking. Students are expected to prepare for class sessions, in part by reflecting on all primary materials. Class preparation includes written documentation of critical reading in order to carry on substantive discussion. Thus, critical reading of and reflection on (primary and other) literature is evidenced in students’ writing for the course. Students are encouraged to keep personal/professional journals during the term of a vehicle for reflection on their first semester of the doctoral program. Students are encouraged to think of writing, not as an “empty academic exercise” but rather as a contribution to the discourses in their fields, a recognition that doctoral candidates have a professional responsibility to contribute to deliberation in their fields (See Gunzenhauser, Citing by Sideswiping.)
4. FRAMING concepts, issues and arguments in problematic ways.
One important ability that doctoral students are expected to demonstrate throughout their study (and in their professional lives) is often referred to as framing issues. The concept of framing issues is often contrasted with the notion of problem solving. Not all contentious situations have easily identifiable problems that can be “solved.” Furthermore, “solved” implies that something is over and done with, a sense of finality that many educational situations cannot warrant. In framing, whether it is an issue (or set of issues), a definition, or an argument, the concern is the manner in which an often-disputed position is stated. The assumption here is that the way in which a position is formulated will determine the inquiry necessary to make a wise judgment. The judgment may not be a permanent solution, but instead a temporary resolution, or it may constitute a better understanding of a dilemma which has no satisfactory resolution.
5. Identifying, accessing and using appropriate LEARNING RESOURCES, including:
· human resources (advisor, faculty, colleagues, study group, networks, etc.);
· libraries; and
· technologies (Blackboard, computerized databases, software, blogs, and other Internet resources).
Students are expected to identify resources that are relevant to their interests around the course reading. Students must be able to obtain information from appropriate sources, such as libraries, computer-based technologies, faculty, colleagues, and organizations. Information from various sources is used to illuminate the particular issue or problem as it occurs in the context of the student’s experience.
6. WORKING IN COLLABORATION as well as individually, including:
· working productively with colleagues; and
· recognizing one’s own role and responsibility within a study group.
Education is a collaborative venture. Learning takes place in groups and one form of deliberation can occur as groups of learners work together with a sense of genuine reciprocity. APS PhD students are expected to understand and practice ways in which productive groups accomplish important goals. As students experience the uncertainties and opportunities that doctoral study engenders, they can understand the ambiguities as a “web of tension” where disagreement, dialogue, and controversy that centers on tasks and dilemmas can be a stimulus to individual and group creativity. The seminar represents a “community of scholars” who plan and carry out productive uses of all group members’ resources.
C. Course Themes
In consultation with the APS faculty, I have identified the following four themes for our work this summer. Each of the themes cuts across education, both formal and informal education, and at all levels from birth to adulthood. The various themes provide us the opportunity to become familiar with the various disciplinary approaches to the study of the collection of areas of concentration that come together as “Administrative and Policy Studies.” Three faculty doing work in these areas will visit our class to discuss their original research with us.
1. Transition to Doctoral Study
2. Education in a Democracy
3. Equity, Equality & Economics
4. Power, Politics, & Praxis
D. Mode/Style of Instruction
Most of the class will be full-group discussions, demonstrations, and small-group exercises. I will lecture minimally, only for additional background material or to clarify important concepts. Class discussion will center on the readings and topics each week. Groups of students will select readings for three of course meetings.
We will use Courseweb to supplement classroom instruction. I will post course documents, resources for assignments, and relevant links on our course page, and you can email the class through this site. This requires everyone to have both an email address and Internet access. Email will be the primary means of communication between classes, and you are welcome to use Courseweb for whatever additional purposes you choose -- discussion boards, group chat, email, and document posting.
Students may find it helpful to meet in groups outside of class time. Groups may use the Courseweb site to facilitate their communication.
The course will proceed with this combination of methods not only because I believe that students learn more through active engagement, but also because my intention is for students to be able to use this course in their subsequent professional practice and scholarship. It is my hope that students will use the material from this course to form interesting and relevant research questions and conduct research that is more rigorous, meaningful, and ethically sound.
E. General Course Requirements and Expectations
Preparation. Meaningful engagement is essential to the success of this course. Students are expected to interpret the readings, connect them to their previous knowledge and experience, and use them to develop their research skills. Students should make every effort to attend class on time and for the full duration. As explained below, grading is based upon the degree of effort and original thought that goes into the assignments.
Readings. Students will benefit from multiple readings of the material before and after class discussion. I expect students to take notes as they read, to organize their thoughts about the readings before class, and to be ready to engage ideas.
Assignments. Students will do various assignments outside of class that will comprise a large part of their learning experience. I encourage you to sit down with me outside of class to work through your assignments. It is largely up to you to make the most of this opportunity. These basic expectations apply to all assignments:
· All work should be typed and double-spaced unless otherwise noted.
· Proofread all work carefully before turning in, even if it means having to take advantage of the 24-hour grace period (see below).
· Staple your assignments, and please do not submit assignments in binders.
· Follow APA style (exception: the cover page is optional; double-sided printing is also optional).
· Unless otherwise noted, please submit your assignments as hard copies.
Timelines. No one wants to fall into the trap of turning assignments in late. Plan now the time you need to devote to them, get them done the best you can, and meet the deadlines. Here’s added incentive: assignments turned in more than 24 hours late will be reduced 1/3 letter grade; the reduction grows the later it is turned in, with assignments one week late reduced a full letter grade and so on. The 24-hour extension is intended for those times when you need just a little bit more time to finish, or if you run into computer problems. I will make exceptions for illness or bizarre circumstances only. Keep at least one hard copy of all submitted work, and be sure to archive all your work electronically. Use Cloud-based back-up procedures to avoid losing work.