THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO

College of Education- Department of Teaching, Learning, and Culture (the department formerly known as Teacher Education)

Title of Course: Sociocultural Foundations of EducationSCFE 6320, CRN 28652

Credits: 3

Semester: spring 2020 Instructor Information:

Name: Char Ullman, Ph.D.

Office: EDUC 804

Office hours: Mondays, 3-5 PM and 8:30-9:30 PM; Fridays, 12-5 PMEmail: cullman@utep.edu

Day/Time: Mondays, 5:30-8:30

Location: EDUC 100b

Hymn, Richard HullCourse Description: Welcome to the Sociocultural Foundations of Education. This course involves and intensive exploration of the sociological, historical, and philosophical foundations of formal education, as well as how current philosophies and teachers' and students' identities shape the everyday practice of schooling. This course is theoretically challenging.

Student Learning Outcomes:

COURSE SPECIFIC STANDARDSSCFE 6320 students will be able to:

Measurements (means of assessment for student learning outcomes listed in first column)

1. Comprehend, engage with, and evaluate key works in the sociology of education.

Essay on The Sociological Imagination

2. Comprehend, engage with, and evaluate key works in the history of education.

Facilitating class discussions on the history of education texts.

3. Critically examine and discuss a course history of education book in relation to a film.

Book and film review assignment

4. Critically examine the philosophical origins of social theories used in educational research and their investigate their impact and use in current scholarship.

Bughouse Square debate assignment

5. Critical discussion and analysis of empirical works in education that are drawn from a particular theoretical frame.

Finding the Sociocultural Foundations of Education

1

Required Texts

Sociology of Education

1. Lareau, A. (2011). Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. ISBN-10: 0520271424. $13.95 on Amazon.

2. Soto, L. (2018). Girlhood in the Borderlands: Mexican Teens Caught in the Crossroads of Migration (Vol. 1). NYU Press. ISBN-10: 1479862010. $13.98 on Amazon.

History of Education

3. Chávez-García, M. (2012). States of Delinquency: Race and Science in the Making of California's Juvenile Justice System. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. ISBN-10: 0520271718. $15.99 on Amazon.

4. Goldstein, D. (2015). The Teacher Wars: A History of America's Most Embattled Profession. New York: Anchor. ISBN-10: 0345803620. $12.81 on Amazon.

5. Ordover, N. (2003). American Eugenics: Race, Queer Anatomy, and the Science of Nationalism. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. ISBN: 978-0816635597. $6.80 on Amazon.

6. Petrzela, N. M. (2015). Classroom Wars: Language, Sex, and the Making of Modern Political Culture. New York: Oxford University Press. ISBN-10: 0190675098. $13.82 on Amazon.

7. Stratton, C. (2016). Education for Empire: American Schools, Race, and the Paths of Good Citizenship. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. ISBN-10: 0520285670. $17.94 on Amazon.

Philosophy

8. Anyon, J. (2011). Marx and Education. New York: Routledge. ISBN-10: 0415803306. $19.74 on Amazon.

9. Ball, S. (2013). Foucault, Power, and Education. New York: Routledge. ISBN-10: 0415895375. $36.89 on Amazon.

10. Britzman, D. (2011). Freud and Education. New York: Routledge. ISBN-10: 041580226. $27.95 on Amazon.

11. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience & Education. New York: Collier Books. ISBN-10: 0684838281. $3.50 on Amazon.

12. Moll, L.C. (2014). L.S. Vygotsky and Education. New York: Routledge. ISBN-10: 0415899494. $32.00 on Amazon.

Total Cost of Books: $215.37 + tax on Amazon.

Required Readings on BlackBoard:

2

13. Bell Jr., D. A. (1995). Brown v. Board of Education and the interest convergence dilemma. In Crenshaw (Ed.), Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings that Formed the Movement. New York: The New Press, pp. 20-28.

14. Crenshaw, K.W. (1995). Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color. In Crenshaw (Ed.), Critical Race Theory: The Key Writings that Formed the Movement. New York: The New Press, pp. 357-383.

Films 1. Alemán, E. (2005). Stolen Education.The Video Project. 1 hr. and 6 min.2. Brodsky, E. (2014). The Year We Thought About Love: Behind the Scenes of Queer Youth

Theater. New Day Films. 1 hr. 8 min.3. Cheng, J. (2006). What's Race Got to Do with It? California Newsreel. 49 min.4. Pillscher, M. (2012).  Broken on All Sides: Race, Mass Incarceration and New

Visions for Criminal Justice. Collective Eye Films. 1hr 8 min.5. Shapiro, D.S. (2017). The State of Eugenics: The Story of Americans Sterilized

against their Will. Brown Doggy Films. 56 min.

Class Policies: This is a seminar course that requires active participation, beginning with coming to each class on time and being fully prepared to contribute to the discussion and activities. Always plan to be in class on time. That said, if something unavoidable comes up (we all know how traffic can be, and then there is parking at UTEP), come to class as soon as possible. Be sure to text me at (915) 238-2327, to let me know when you will arrive. Also, all written assignments for this course will be submitted electronically, through Blackboard. No paper assignments will be accepted.

Families. Going to school and raising children can be tough. If you need to bring a child (or two?) into our classroom, I support you in doing that. Please be sure to bring things for them to do while they are here. And as a colleague of mine, Dr. Kip Hinton at UT-Rio Grande Valley says, “if their enthusiasm becomes a distraction,” be ready to take them into the hallway to calm them down.

Standards of academic integrity: Students are expected to uphold the highest standards of academic integrity.  Any form of scholastic dishonesty is an affront to the pursuit of knowledge and jeopardizes the quality of the degree awarded to all graduates of UTEP. Any student who commits an act of scholastic dishonesty is subject to discipline. Scholastic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to cheating, plagiarism, collusion, the submission for credit of any work or materials that are not attributable in whole or in part to another person, taking an examination for another person, any act designed to give unfair advantage to a student or the attempt to commit such acts.  Proven violations of the detailed regulations, as printed in the Handbook of Operating Procedures (HOP) and available in the Office of the Dean of Students, may result in sanctions ranging from disciplinary probation, to failing grades on the work in question, to failing grades in the course, to suspension or dismissal among others.

Students with different abilities statement: If you have or believe you have a disability, you may wish to self-identify. You can do so by providing documentation to the Center for Accommodations and Support Services (CASS) located in Union E Room

3

106. Students who have been designated as having a disability must reactivate their standing with CASS on a yearly basis. Failure to report to this office will place a student on the inactive list and nullify benefits received. If you have a condition which may affect your ability to exit safely from the premises in an emergency or which may cause an emergency during class, you are encouraged to discuss this in confidence with the instructor and/or the director of CASS. You may call 915-747-5148 for general information about the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

Help with writing. Virtually everyone needs help with writing academic English. There’s no shame in it. The University Writing Center (UWC) – Library Building, Rm. 227, 747-5112) provides walk-in assistance with writing to all UTEP students at no cost. They also do online consultations. It is a terrific resource. If I suggest you attend the Writing Center, it’s because I think you will benefit from it. It’s not a punishment and it’s not a sign that you will be asked to leave the program. If you need assistance with writing, the tutors at the UWC can help you. They are good. Check the website for more information: http://uwc.utep.edu

Special considerations regarding participation. We will be reading many exciting and difficult texts in this course. While you are required to do three important writing assignments over the course of the semester, I am not requiring you to turn in written work in which you summarize and reflect on the readings before each class meeting. I’ve found that at the doctoral level, regular pre-reading assignments can be a distraction from reading the text, rather than an incentive to read thoroughly. I have made this decision in hopes that it will give you time to read each text with care. In order for that plan to work, you must come to class ready to discuss the day’s readings. With that said, I expect you to come to class with two comments and/or two questions about each work we have read for that day. Because this course is organized as a seminar, you must be ready to participate actively in the discussions each week. If I observe that people aren’t completing the readings on time, I will ask that you turn those comments and questions in before class. I don’t want you to have to do that. Please don’t make me.

Evaluation & Coursework Requirements for Students:

Coursework Requirements

4

Essay on the Sociological Imagination 15 pts.Facilitating Class Discussion: History 15 pts. Book and Film Review 10 pts. Bughouse Square Debate 20 pts.Finding the Sociocultural Foundations 40 pts.TOTAL 100 pts

5

How Grades are DeterminedGrade Earned Points A 90 -100 B 80- 89 C 70- 79 D 60- 69 F Below 60

Assignment #1: Essay on the Sociological Imagination DUE: 11:59 PM, Thurs., Feb. 27, 2020

Sociologist C. Wright Mills defined the sociological imagination as "the vivid awareness of the relationship between personal experience and the wider society" (1959, p. 6). The sociological imagination is about understanding how our individual biographies are impacted by larger historical processes. It’s about understanding how we are shaped by our social, cultural, and economic contexts, our values, and how we are treated by others.The sociological imagination can be understood as a quality of mind that understands the interaction between the individual and society.

ReferencesMills, C. W. (1959). The Sociological Imagination. New York: Penguin Press.

For this assignment, you will write a 12-page or 3,000 word essay in which you analyze the authors’ use of the sociological imagination in both Unequal Childhoods: Class, Race, and Family Life and Girlhood in the Borderlands: Mexican Teens Caught in the Crossroads of Migration. You will compare and contrast how Mills’ idea of the sociological imagination is enacted in both texts. While I have given you an introduction to this idea above, in order complete the essay effectively, you will want to read this excerpt from The Sociological Imagination. https://sites.middlebury.edu/utopias/files/2013/02/The-Promise.pdfYou will use APA style, spell-check and edit your work, and I invite you to send your work to the Writing Center if you are new to academic writing.

6

Rubric for Essay on the Sociological Imagination (worth up to 15 pts.)Category Exceeds

standardMeets standard Does not meet

standard1 Introduction with thesis

statement.The paper is introduced with background and a clear and elegant thesis statement.

There is an introduction with some background, but the thesis statement is unclear.

There is no thesis statement. The introduction does not provide appropriate background for the essay.

1 1 .5 02 Explanation of the

sociological imagination

The sociological imagination is clearly explained with appropriate citations. Quotes are used only minimally, and paraphrasing is employed well.

The sociological imagination is explained and some citations are included.

The meaning of the sociological imagination is assumed.

1 3 2 13 Comparison and

contrast with extensive examples for both texts.

Examples of the sociological imagination from each text are well explained and cited, and they are compared and contrasted with aplomb.

Examples of the sociological imagination from each text are included, but the comparison and contrast is limited.

Examples of the sociological imagination from each text are mentioned, but not elaboarated upon. The comparison and contrast is severly limited

7 7-6 5-3 2-14 Conclusion Insightful

comments are made about the findings of the comparison and contrast.

The conclusion summarizes what the author did.

There is no conclusion.

1 2 1 05 Mechanics APA style is

followed throughout the essay, and it is edited and spell-checked.

APA style is followed in some instances, but not all. The essay has some errors, but the meaning is clear.

APA style is used only sporadically, and the meaning is unclear.

1 1 .5 0TOTAL 15

7

Assignment #2: Facilitating Class Discussions on History of Education Texts DUE: Between Feb. 27-Mar. 30

You and a partner will be assigned to facilitate the discussion of one of the history texts for the course. While I will take your particular interests under advisement, know that “you can’t always get what you want, but if you try sometimes, you find, you get what you need” (Jagger/Richards, 1969).

ReferencesJagger, M. & Richads, K. (1969). You can’t always get what you want” Honky Tonk

Women. London, UK: Olympic Studios.

You and your assigned partner will lead one class discussion of a history text you have been given. You must create a PowerPoint for that week that includes discussion questions, and involves moving through the text, either thematically or sequentially. You must engage your classmates in a scholarly discussion and demonstrate competence with the text. Each class session is 2 hours and 40 minutes long, and you and your partner will be responsible for leading the entire class. The films will be shown at the end of each class and I will take care of showing the films.

Text Film Length1 The Teacher Wars Stolen Education 1 hr. 6 min.2 Education for Empire What’s Race Got to Do with it? 49 min.3 American Eugenics The State of Eugenics 56 min.4 States of Delinquency Broken on All Sides 1 hr. 8 min.5 Classroom Wars The Year We Thought about

Love1 hr. 8 min.

8

Rubric for Class Discussions on History of Education Texts (worth up to 15 pts.)Category Exceeds standard Meets standard Does not meet

standard1 PowerPoint The entire text is discussed,

either sequentially or thematically. Discussion questions are engaging and deal with key themes and ideas.

ThThe key ideas and themes in the text are discussed. Discussion questions M. mostly deal with the key ideas and themes.

Only a limited part of the text is discussed. The discussion is disorganized. The discussion questions are simplistic.

4 4-3 2 1-02 Engaging

discussionAll of the students in the class participate meaningfully in the discussion, either through whole group or small group discussions. The presenters keep important conversations of key themes and ideas going through comments and more questions.

The majority of students in the class participate in the discussion. The presenters allow for some key ideas and themes to be discussed, but other important ones are missing.

The presenters facilitate only minimal meaningful scholarly conversation.

4 4-3 2 1-03 Competence

with the textThe presenters demonstrate a deep understanding of the text, through their PowerPoint presentation and through the questions that ask and their comments.

The presenters show that they have read and thought about the key ideas and themes in the text. They may have missed some important ideas.

The presenters do not demonstrate an understanding of the text.

4 4-3 2 1-04 Cooperation

between presenters

The facilitation and presentation work is divided evenly between the presenters. The presenters share facilitation responsibilities with ease.

One presenter dominates more than the other in terms of preparation and presentation. There is some minimal conflict between them.

Neither presenter cooperates with the other.

3 3 2 1-0

TOTAL 15

9

Assignment #3: Book and Film ReviewDUE: 11:59 PM Thurs., Ap.2

In this assignment, you will select a history text and the corresponding film, and write a 10-page, 2,500-word essay in which you put the key themes and ideas of the text into conversation with the film. Are there themes in one that are not addressed or developed in the other? Are there things missing from each? What are they? While your focus will be on the text, you will also bring key ideas from the film into play. You will offer a summary and critique of the book and incorporate insights from the film into it, as well.

This review will be written in APA style, and might be something that you could get published in a scholarly journal.

Text Film Length1 The Teacher Wars Stolen Education 1 hr. 6 min.2 Education for Empire What’s Race Got to Do with

it?49 min.

3 American Eugenics The State of Eugenics 56 min.4 States of Delinquency Broken on All Sides 1 hr. 8 min.5 Classroom Wars The Year We Thought about

Love1 hr. 8 min.

10

Rubric for Book and Film Review Assignment (worth up to 10 pts.)Category Exceeds

standardMeets standard Does not meet

standard1 Introduction and

thesis statementThe introduction includes sufficient background and the thesis statement is clear and concise.

The introduction has some background and there is a thesis statement.

There is limited background and the thesis statement is unclear or absent.

1 1 .5 02 Summary of text

and filmThe majority of the summary focuses on the text, and the film is included as well.

The text and the film are summarized and equal time is given to each.

Only the text or only the film is summarized.

3 3 2 1-03 Critique of text

and film The critique of the text is thoughtful and well substantiated with examples. The film is brought into the critique.

The critique of the text includes detail from both the text and the film, equally.

The critique of the text is superficial and depends on broad generalizations. The same is true for the film.

4 4-3 2 1-04 Conclusion Insightful

comments are made about the critique(s).

The conclusion summarizes what the author did.

There is no conclusion.

1 1 .5 05 Mechanics APA style is

followed throughout the essay, and it is edited and spell-checked.

APA style is followed in some instances, but not all. The essay has some errors, but the meaning is clear.

APA style is used only sporadically, and the meaning is unclear.

1TOTAL 10

11

Assignment #4: Bughouse Square DebateDUE: May 4 and May 11

What is Bughouse Square? Well, between the 1880s and the 1930s, and then from 1986 until the present, it has been a colloquial name for what happens in Washington Park in Chicago. At the turn of the last century (1899-1900), bughouse was slang for a mental health facility, and the park earned its nickname because of the free-flowing discourse displayed there. Bughouse Square is where people stood on soapboxes and spoke their minds. Many of the speakers from the 1880s to the 1930s were famous intellectuals, poets, philosophers, and political radicals, including Emma Goldman, Eugene V. Debs, and Carl Sandburg. In a sociological study of that part of Chicago published in 1929, Zorbaugh wrote:

By day its benches are filled with [people] reading newspapers, talking or just sitting in the sun. But at night, crowded along its curbstones, are gathered groups of [people], often as many as a hundred in a group, listening to the impassioned pleas of the soap-box orator, the propagandist, and the agitator. All their arguments come down to one or the other of two propositions: the economic system is all wrong, or there is no God.

ReferencesClifford, R., Zorbaugh, F., McKay, H. D., & Contrell, L. S. (1929). Delinquency areas.

Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.

The Bughouse Square oratory tradition was reinstated in 1986, and since then the speakers have focused on topics such as education, labor, and technology. Every year, the winner of the soapbox oratory competition is awarded with a Dill Pickle.

We will award our winners with a jar of escabeche.

This is two-night process.First nightYou will work with a partner of your choice this time, and your job will be to prepare a propositional statement about your school of thought, explaining why it is the best theoretical approach to understanding educational policies and practices. Each group will have six minutes to present their proposition speech. This will involve reading a written document. A six-minute speech is approximately three and a half pages.

Then, there will be a crossfire period, in which all debaters will hold the floor and each group will get a chance to ask for clarification from the other schools of thought and ask questions of the other debaters. Each school of thought will have 4 min. to question each other group, and each group will have 4 min. to respond.

12

Second nightAfter having considered the arguments made during last week’s crossfire, you will prepare four rebuttals for each of the other schools of thought in which you explain why your school of thought is better than each of the other schools of thought. Each rebuttal will be four minutes long. Then, each group will have six minutes to make a final argument for their school of thought, taking the arguments that have come up into consideration. This project will require preparatory work outside of class.

Each group is responsible for their first proposition, four rebuttals, and their final proposition. This chart lays it out for you.

Theoretical School

Proposition 1Proposition 2

Rebuttals to Marx

Rebuttals to Freud

Rebuttals toVygotsky

Rebuttals to CRT

Rebuttals to Foucault

Marx Theorists from the Marxist tradition offer the best approach to understanding educational policy and practice.

Argument for Marxist approach in contrast to Freudianapproach.

Argument for Marxist approach in contrast to Vygotskianapproach.

Argument for Marxist approach in contrast to CRTapproach.

Argument for Marxist approach in contrast to Foucauldianapproach.

Freud Theorists from the Freudian tradition offer the best approach to understanding educational policy and practice.

Argument for Freudian approach in contrast to Marxist approach.

Argument for Freudian approach in contrast to Vygotskianapproach.

Argument forFreudian approach in contrast to CRTapproach.

Argument forFreudian approach in contrast to Foucauldianapproach.

Vygotsky Theorists from the Vygostskian tradition offer the best approach to understanding educational policy and practice.

Argument for Vygotskianapproach in contrast to Marxist approach.

Argument for Vygotskian approach in contrast to Freudianapproach.

Argument for Vygotskian approach in contrast to CRTapproach.

Argument forVygotskianapproach in contrast to Foucauldianapproach.

CRT Theorists from the Critical Race Theory tradition offer the best

Argument for CRTapproach in contrast to Marxist

Argument for CRT approach in contrast to

Argument for CRT approach in contrast to Vygotskian

Argument forCRTapproach in contrast to

13

approach to understanding educational policy and practice.

approach. Freudianapproach.

approach. Foucauldianapproach.

Foucault Theorists from the Foucauldian tradition offer the best approach to understanding educational policy and practice.

Argument for Foucauldianapproach in contrast to Marxist approach.

Argument for Foucauldian approach in contrast to Freudianapproach.

Argument forFoucauldian approach in contrast to Vygotskianapproach.

Argument forFoucauldian approach in contrast to CRTapproach.

14

Rubric for Bughouse Square Debate Assignment (worth up to 20 pts.)Category Exceeds standard Meets standard Does not meet standard

1 Proposition 1

The argument is clear. Key points of the viewpoint are mentioned and supported. Time requirements are followed.

The argument is clear. Some of the points mentioned aren’t the most important, but examples are provided. The speakers are rushed.

The argument is unclear. The key points aren’t mentioned and are not well supported. The speakers run out of time.

4 4-3 2 1-02 Rebuttal 1 The argument against this

theoretical school is clear, persuasive and uses examples. Time limits are abided by.

The argument against this school is clear and uses examples, but is not especially persuasive.

3 3 2 13 Rebuttal 2 The argument against this

theoretical school is clear, persuasive and uses examples. Time limits are abided by.

The argument against this school is clear and uses examples, but is not especially persuasive. The presentation is a bit rushed.

The argument against this school is unclear and ill-informed. The time limits are not abided by.

3 3 2 14 Rebuttal 3 The argument against this

theoretical school is clear, persuasive and uses examples. Time limits are abided by.

The argument against this school is clear and uses examples, but is not especially persuasive. The presentation is a bit rushed.

The argument against this school is unclear and ill-informed. The time limits are not abided by.

3 3 2 15 Rebuttal 4 The argument against this

theoretical school is clear, persuasive and uses examples. Time limits are abided by.

The argument against this school is clear and uses examples, but is not especially persuasive. The presentation is a bit rushed.

The argument against this school is unclear and ill-informed. The time limits are not abided by.

3 3 2 1

6 Proposition The argument is clear. Key The argument is clear. The argument is unclear.

15

2 points of the viewpoint are mentioned and supported. Insights from the crossfire are incorporated to strengthen the argument. Time requirements are followed.

Some of the points mentioned aren’t the most important, but examples are provided. A few insights from the crossfire are incorporated to strengthen the argument. The speakers are rushed.

The key points aren’t mentioned and are not well supported. None of the insights from the crossfire are incorporated into the argument. The speakers run out of time.

4 4-3 2 1-0TOTAL 20

16

Assignment #5: Finding the Sociocultural Foundations of Education DUE: 11:59 PM, Thurs., May 14, 2020

In this final assignment for the course, you will write a 5,000-word essay, 20 pages including references, in which you focus on one of the schools of thought we have studied this semester, and you write a critical review of empirical studies in education that employ that theoretical point of view. The studies can be books, articles, or a combination of both. You will share an initial reference list in class, and will receive oral feedback on it to ensure that you are on the right track with the empirical works you select. You will use APA style.

17

Rubric for Finding the Sociocultural Foundations of Education Assignment (worth up to 40 pts.)

Category Exceeds standard Meets standard Does not meet standard

1 Introduction The introduction provides background and includes a clear and eloquent thesis statement.

The introduction provides some background and includes a thesis statement.

The introduction provides limited background and there is no thesis statement.

2 2 1 .5-02 Description

of theoretical school

The school of thought is clearly described, and includes important concepts.

The school of thought is clearly described, but some of the important concepts are left out.

The school of thought is described very generally, and key concepts are omitted.

4 4-3 2 1-03 Critical

review of empirical studies that use that theoretical school.

The appropriate works are critiqued with clear and thoughtful arguments.

The appropriate works are critiqued, but some of the arguments are clear and others are not.

The works discussed are not empirical and do not all use the theoretical school under study.

25 25-15 14-4 3-04 Conclusion Conclusions are made

about what kinds of insights are possible through the use of this lens, with reference to the works critiqued.

Conclusions about what kinds of insights are possible through this lens, but the works critiqued are not mentioned.

The conclusion summarizes only what the author did.

2 2 1 .5-05 References References follow APA

format.Most of the references follow APA format, but there are inconsistencies.

APA format is not used.

1 1 .5 06 Mechanics The paper is clearly

written and edited and follows APA style throughout.

The paper is clearly written but there are a few editing and APA style errors.

The paper has significant errors that impact meaning.

1 1 .5 0TOTAL 40

18

Course Schedule for Spring 2020*

In-Class Activities Homework0 Mon., Jan. 20 Obtain books for course!Introduction to the Sociocultural Foundations of Education1 Mon., Jan. 27 Introductions

Visit from UTEDS (survey)Review syllabusReview On Creating Intellectual CommunitySign up sheets for group work.Raffle off copy of Education & Experience

ReadEducation & Experience, Dewey

2 Mon., Feb. 3 Guest expert: Marissa Testerman, librarian extraordinaire.Discuss Education & Experience

Feb. 5 is Census DayReadUnequal Childhoods, Lareau

Sociology of Education3 Mon., Feb. 10 Discuss Unequal Childhoods Read

Girlhood in the Borderlands, Soto

4 Mon., Feb. 17 Discuss Girlhood in the Borderlands

ReadThe Teacher Wars, Goldstein

History of Education5 Mon., Feb. 24 Discuss Teacher Wars

Watch Stolen EducationReadEducation for Empire, StattonAssignment #1: Essay on the Sociological Imagination DUE: 11:59 PM, Thurs., Feb. 27, 2020

6 Mon., Mar. 2 Discuss Education for EmpireWatch What's Race Got to Do with It?

ReadAmerican Eugenics, Ordover

7 Mon., Mar. 9 Discuss American EugenicsWatch The State of Eugenics: The Story of Americans Sterilized against their Will

Read States of Delinquency, Chavez-García

19

8 Mon., Mar. 16-22 SPRING BREAK

9 Mon., Mar. 23 Discuss States of DelinquencyWatch Broken on All Sides: Race, Mass Incarceration and New Visions for Criminal Justice

ReadClassroom Wars, Mehlman Petrzela

10 Mon., Mar. 30 Discuss Classroom WarsWatch The Year We Thought About Love: Behind the Scenes of Queer Youth Theater

ReadMarx and Education, Anyonand Mapping the margins: Intersectionality, identity politics, and violence against women of color, CrenshawBrown v. Board of Education and the interest convergence dilemma, BellCritical Race Theory (CRT)

Book and film review assignment DUE: 11:59 PM Thurs., Ap.2

Philosophy of Education10 Mon., Ap. 6 Discuss Marx and Education

and CRT theoryReadFreud and Education, Britzman

11 Mon., Ap. 13 Guest expert: Marissa Testerman, librarian extraordinaire Discuss Freud and Education

Read Vygotsky and Education, Moll

12 Mon., Ap. 20 Discuss Vygotsky and Education

Read Foucault, Power, and Education, Ball

13 Mon., Ap. 27 Discuss Foucault, Power, and Education

Prepare for Bughouse Square Debate 1

14 Mon., May 4 Bughouse Square Debates 1 Prepare for Bughouse Square Debate 215 Mon., May 11 Bughouse Square Debates 2

Pot luckFinding the Social Foundations of Education paper DUE: 11:59 PM, Thurs., May 14, 2020

*Schedule is subject to change.

20