|
LACTE
Pilot Course/Module
Development
Guidelines
(Revised
1/28/97)
DESCRIPTORS
OF STUDENT CENTERED COURSES
Highly Desirable Characteristics
collaborative
groups
classroom
discussions
constructivist
philosophy
dialogue
teaching
interdisciplinary
approach
integrative
applications
learning
styles awareness
metacognitive
approach
student
inquiry
use
of technology
written
and oral communication
formative
classroom assessment
Optional and Desirable Characteristics
career
information
expository
papers
field
trips
guest
speakers
outside
reading
peer
study groups
Definitions
Constructivist
Philosophy holds that knowledge is constructed and
built
on prior information. Learning
that is student centered and controlled
promotes
the construction of knowledge. The
process is enhanced by
student
discourse, with further study
promoted by curiosity and uncertainty.
Metacognition
refers to self-awareness of one's own thinking processes.
A
metacognitive approach will provide activities that promote
student awareness
of their thinking processes. In
problem solving students plan,
monitor and evaluate their own progress toward a concrete goal.
Student
Inquiry is a method by which students build their own
knowledge
through guided discovery.
Other Considerations for Course Developers
Ideally,
a LACTE supported project is led by one or more full-time faculty at a
LACTE institution. The
faculty member(s) should be participating in the Collabora-tive as
evidenced by one or more of the following:
attending LACTE events on the home campus, signing on to the
LACTE email list, participating in LACTE faculty development workshops,
recruiting and/or mentoring students,
and
involvement in LACTE committee work.
Course/module developer(s)
should
have solicited input and/or collaboration from colleagues at other LACTE
institutions. As the
project progresses, developer(s) should continue to consult
with
and inform LACTE colleagues. Developer(s)
should expect to present the results of the project at a LACTE sponsored
workshop. As a result of the NSF
goal
of broad dissemination and implementation of math/science reform, LACTE
encourages developer(s) to produce commercially publishable products
(i.e., textbooks, CD-ROM's, manuals, etc.) and will assist in the search
for a suitable publisher if the developer(s) so desire.
Products produced (commercial or otherwise) will acknowledge NSF/LACTE
funding. Developer(s) should
contact
their campus coordinator for more specific information about budget and
availability of funding.
Los Angeles Collaborative for Teacher
Excellence
Course/Module
Development Proposal
Course/Module
Title:
Proposer(s)
Information:
Name(s)
Title
Department
Institution
Mailing Address
Telephone
email
fax
Abstract
(Brief Course/Module Description):
Date Submitted:
Los
Angeles Collaborative for
Teacher
Excellence
Course/Module
Development Proposal Questions
Please describe
your project addressing each question below and using the same numbering
as the questions. Maximum
limit: 6 pages.
1.
Describe your proposed course/module.
Discuss how your course incorporates student centered
instructional techniques and makes use of technology.
(Refer to the Pilot Course/Module Development Guidelines for a
list of desirable characteristics.)
Describe your student assessment plans.
2.
What is the intended audience for this course?
What prerequisite knowledge is desired?
Will this prerequisite requirement limit access to the course?
3.
How does this project relate to or build on prior reform effort
in your discipline and/or within LACTE?
4.
How does this course align with the State of California
Commission on Teacher Credentialing guidelines (available from your
campus coordinator)? Discuss
the significance of this course for a future teacher.
5.
Describe the development team (or the developer).
(Attach cv(s) as an appendix.)
Are there plans to involve faculty members from other LACTE
institutions or K-12 teachers in the development or piloting phases?
(LACTE can help identify such consultants.)
6.
Does this course fit into the subject matter credential program
at your institution? Will
this course become part of the regular curriculum at your institution or
will the module fit into an existing course at your institution? Are
there any plans for piloting this course at another LACTE institution?
7.
By what criteria will you evaluate the effectiveness of your
course/module? What
evaluation tools (e.g., student outcomes, student surveys, standardized
testing, peer evaluation, etc.) will you use?
(LACTE can provide a peer observation team.)
8.
What materials/products will your project produce?
What means of dissemination (presentation at meetings, manuscript
for commercial publishing, software, electronic, etc.) do you foresee?
9.
Present a budget with short explanation for each item.
10.
Present a timeline of activities for this project.
NOTE TO COURSE
DEVELOPERS: The following
evaluation form is included for your own information.
It will be used by the LACTE Curriculum Committee to evaluate
your proposal.
Evaluation Form for LACTE
Course/Module Development Proposal
Respond to each
of the following questions with a rating of 1 - 5, as designated on the
following scale:
1-Unacceptable
2-Major Problems 3-Minor
Problems 4-Good 5-Excellent
1
2 3
4 5 Is
the proposed course/module content clearly defined?
1
2 3
4 5 To
what extent are student centered learning techniques
incorporated?
1
2 3
4 5 How
is classroom assessment addressed in the proposal?
1
2 3
4 5 Does
the proposal reflect knowledge of the appropriate
reform efforts?
1
2 3
4 5 Is
this course appropriate for future teachers?
1
2 3
4 5 Does
the course align with the State of California
Commission on Teacher Credentialing guidelines?
1
2 3
4 5 What
are the prospects for institutionalization?
1
2 3
4 5 Does
the development team appear to have the
necessary expertise and
philosophy?
1
2 3
4 5 Has
the development team shown evidence of
consulting with or working
with other LACTE faculty?
1
2 3
4 5 What
are the prospects for this course being offered
outside the home institution?
1
2 3 4 5
Are the dissemination plans reasonable and realistic?
1
2 3
4 5 Is
the budget reasonable?
1
2 3
4 5 Is
the timeline realistic?
1
2 3
4 5 Is
the course/module evaluation effectively designed?
1
2 3
4 5 Overall
recommendation for the project
(Scale for this
item: 1-Reject
2-Below Average 3-Average 4-Good
5-Excellent)
|
