devalenz@unm.edu

click here to go to course home page
Special Education 593 (006):
The Social Construction of Disability


---

Preliminary Syllabus
Spring, 2001, Tuesdays, 7-9:30 p.m. (3 credit hours), Dane Smith Hall 128
.

Instructor:	Julia Scherba de Valenzuela, Ph.D. .       .  .    .    .
Office:	Education Office Building, rm. 203

E-mail:	devalenz@unm.edu	Phone:	7-1406
Web site:	http://www.unm.edu/~devalenz/	Fax:	7-7228
Office Hours:	Tuesdays 3:30-6:30 on a drop-in basis (no appointment needed)

.
The following information is included in this syllabus:
• course description
• rationale
• course objectives
• required readings
• recommended readings
• other recommended readings
• course design
• course requirements
• evaluation procedures
• grading system
• late paper policy
• re-writes
• class attendance & participation policies
• class schedule
• instructor's vision & mission statement
• COE mission statement
• COE conceptual framework

.

---

Course Description:
This course will explore the concept of disabilities as a ‘social construction’ from a variety of perspectives: historical, institutional, cultural, linguistic, gender, and from that of the individual. This idea of the social construction of disability has received considerable attention in the Special Education literature and this course is designed to prepare future teachers and researchers to interact with others regarding this concept in an articulate and informed manner. In this course we will:

examine relevant literature,

discuss current theory, and

deconstruct popular media, including films and written biographies.

---

Rationale:
The mission of the College of Education is to advance the quality of the educational experience for all learners and to educate professionals who can facilitate human growth in schools, homes, communities, and workplaces. In carrying out this mission, the College explicitly values diversity in people and perspectives. The rationale for the Mental Retardation and Severe Disabilities Program is supported by a shift in the major paradigm in mental retardation, severe disabilities, and bilingual special education from a solely trait-based conceptualization toward thinking about disabilities as an interaction between individuals with severe limitations in intellectual functioning or from cultural and linguistic diverse backgrounds, their environments, and needed supports. This new way of thinking forces reanalysis of structures designed to assist individual in creating for themselves satisfying lives and challenges traditional notions of disabilities and handicaps.

This course supports the College of Education and Mental Retardation and Severe Disabilities Program frameworks by addressing student abilities within the context of a diverse society, recognizing the need to support all individuals in life-long learning, and validating all individuals, including those with disabilities, as valuable members of their communities, including their communities of learners.

---

Course Objectives:
The objectives of this course are to prepare and develop teachers and other leaders who:
• ...understand and are able to articulate a theoretically grounded definition of the social construction of disability.
• ...understand how actions on the part of individuals can function to reconfirm or contest common notions of ability/disability.
• ...understand how individual characteristics, such as socioeconomic status, ethnicity, language background, ethnicity, age, etc., contribute to the social construction of disability.
• ...understand the function of social institutions, such as schools, in the social construction of disability.
• ...understand how portrayals of individuals with disabilities in the media contribute to the social construction of disabilities.
• ...are able to identify fundamental assumptions underlying service provision systems (i.e. special education or institutions) for individuals with disabilities.

---


Required Readings:
(reading packet on sale at the COE Publications Center)
.
Bogdan, R. (1980). What does it mean when a person says, "I am not retarded"? Education and Training of the Mentally Retarded, 15(1), 74-79.
.
Bogdan, R., Biklen, D., Shapiro, A., & Spelkoman, D. (1982). The disabled: Media's monster. Social Policy, 13(2), 32-35.
.
Bogdan, R., & Knoll, J. (1995). The sociology of disability. In E. L. Meyen & T. M. Skrtic (Eds.), Special education and student disability, an introduction: Traditional, emerging, and alternative perspectives (4th ed., pp. 675-711). Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
.
Cortés, C. E. (1995). Knowledge construction and popular culture: The media as multicultural educator. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 169-183). New York: MacMillan.
.
Danforth, S. (2000). What can the field of developmental disabilities learn from Michel Foucault? Mental Retardation, 38(4), 364-369.
.
Danforth, S., & Navarro, V. (1998). Speech acts: Sampling the social construction of mental retardation in everyday life. Mental Retardation, 36(1), 31-43.
.
Danforth, S., & Rhodes, W. C. (1997). Deconstructing disability: A philosophy for inclusion. Remedial and Special Education, 18(6), 357-366.
.
Darling-Hammond, L. (1995). Inequality and access to knowledge. In J. A. Banks & C. A. M. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of research on multicultural education (pp. 465-483). New York: MacMillan.
.
de Valenzuela, J. S., Connery, M. C., & Musanti, S. I. (2000). The theoretical foundations of professional development in special education: Is sociocultural theory enough? Remedial and Special Education, 21(2), 111-120.
.
Ferguson, P. M. (1987). The social construction of mental retardation. Social Policy, 18(1), 51-56.
.
Figueroa, R. A. (1999). Special education for Latino students in the United States: A metaphor for what is wrong. In T. V. Fletcher & C. S. Bos (Eds.), Helping individuals with disabilities and their families: Mexican and U.S. perspectives (pp. 147-159). Tempe, AZ: Bilingual Review/Press.
.
Gartner, A. (1982). Images of the disabled/disabling images. Social Policy, 13(2), 15.
.
Gelb, S. A. (2000). "Be cruel!" Dare we take Foucault seriously? Mental Retardation, 38(4), 369-372.
.
Goode, D. (1992). Who is Bobby? Ideology and method in the discovery of a Down syndrome person's competence. In P. M. Ferguson & D. L. Ferguson & S. J. Taylor (Eds.), Interpreting disability: A qualitative reader (pp. 197-212). New York: Teachers College Press.
.
Harlan, S. L., & Robert, P. M. (1998). The social construction of disability in organizations: Why employers resist reasonable accommodation. Work and Occupations, 25(4), 397-435.
.
Jones, S. R. (1996). Toward inclusive theory: Disability as social construction. NASPA Journal, 33(4), 347-354.
.
Luckasson, R. (September/October 2000). New draft definition of mental retardation proposed. American Association on Mental Retardation: News and Notes, 1, 12.
.
Luckasson, R., et. al. (1997). Mental retardation: Definition, classification, and system of supports (9th ed.). Washington, DC: American Association on Mental Retardation.
.
McLaren, P. (1994). Life in schools: An introduction to critical pedagogy in the foundations of education (2nd ed.). New York: Longman. (chapter 5 is included in the required reading packet)
.
Mehan, H., Hertweck, A., & Meihls, J. L. (1986). Handicapping the handicapped: Decision making in students' educational careers. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. (Chapter 7 is included in the required reading packet)
.
Mercer, J. R. (1992). The impact of changing paradigms of disability on mental retardation in the year 2000. In L. Rowitz (Ed.), Mental Retardation in the year 2000 (pp. 15-38). New York: Springer-Verlag.
.
Peter, D. (2000). Dynamics of discourse: A case study illuminating power relations in mental retardation. Mental Retardation, 38(4), 354-362.
.
Rao, S. S. (2000). Perspectives of an African American mother on parent-professional relationships in special education. Mental Retardation, 38(6), 475-488.
.
Rhodes, R. L. (1998). An introduction to school psychology and special education services in Mexico. Unpublished Conference Presentation -- BorderWalking, NMSU.
.
Rueda, R. (1989). Defining mild disabilities with language-minority students. Exceptional Children, 56(2), 121-128.
.
Safran, S. P. (1998). Disability portrayal in film: Reflecting the past, directing the future. Exceptional Children, 64, 227-238.
.
Sleeter, C. E. (1986). Learning disabilities: The social construction of a special education category. Exceptional Children, 53(1), 46-54.
.
Stainback, W., & Stainback, S. (1984). A rationale for the merger of special and regular education. Exceptional Children, 51(2), 102.
.
Taylor, S. J. (1988). Caught in the continuum: A critical analysis of the principle of the least restrictive environment. JASH, 13(1), 41-53.
.
Taylor, S. J. (2000). Perspectives: Two perspectives on Foucault and postmodernism. Mental Retardation, 38(4), 363.
.
Taylor, S. J., & Bogdan, R. (1980). Defending illusions: The institution's struggle for survival. Human Organization, 39(3), 209-218.
.
Wiest, D. J., & Kreil, D. A. (1995). Transformational obstacles in special education. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 28(7), 399-407.
.


---


Recommended Readings:
(reading packet on sale at the COE Publications Center)
.
Artiles, A. J. (1998). The dilemma of difference: Enriching the disproportionality discourse with theory and context. The Journal of Special Education, 32(1), 32-36.
.
Biklen, D. (1988). The myth of clinical judgment. Journal of Social Issues, 44(1), 127-140.
.
Biklen, D., Corrigan, C., & Quick, D. (1989). Beyond obligation: Students' relations with each other in integrated classes. In D. K. Lipsky & A. Gartner (Eds.), Beyond separate education: Quality education for all (pp. 207-223). Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.
.
Campbell-Whatley, G. D., & Comer, J. (2000). Self-concept and African-American student achievement: Related issues of ethics, power and privilege. Teacher Education and Special Education, 23(1), 19-31.
.
Danforth, S. (1995). Toward a critical theory approach to lives considered emotionally disturbed. Behavioral Disorders, 20(2), 136-143.
.
Day-Vines, N. L. (2000). Ethics, power, and privilege: Salient issues in the development of multicultural competencies for teachers serving African American children with disabilities. Teacher Education and Special Education, 23(1), 3-18.
.
Delgado-Gaitan, C., & Trueba, H. (1991). Crossing cultural borders: Education for immigrant families in America. London: The Falmer Press. -- chapter 1 included in packet
.
Dudley-Marling, C., & Dippo, D. (1995). What learning disability does: Sustaining the ideology of schooling. Journal of Learning Disability, 28(7), 408-414.
.
Duplass, D., & Smith, T. (1995). Hearing Dennis through his own voice: A redefinition. Behavioral Disorders, 20(2), 144-148.
.
Ferguson, P. M., & Ferguson, D. L. (1996). Communicating adulthood: The meanings of independent living for people with significant cognitive disabilities and their families. Topics in Language Disorders, 16(3), 52-67.
.
Forness, S. R. (1988). Reductionism, paradigm shifts, and learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(7), 421-424.
.
Harry, B. (1992). Cultural diversity, families, and the special education system: Communication and empowerment. New York: Teachers College Press. -- chapter 1 included in reading packet
.
Kalyanpur, M., & Harry, B. (1999). Culture in special education: Building reciprocal family-professional relationships. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes. -- chapter 2 included in reading packet
.
Kimball, W. H., & Heron, T. E. (1988). A behavioral commentary on Poplin's discussion of reductionist fallacy and holistic/constructivist principles. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(7), 425-428, 447.
.
Mactavish, J. B., Mahon, M. J., & Lutfiyya, Z. M. (2000). "I can speak for myself": Involving individuals with intellectual disabilities as research participants. Mental Retardation, 38(3), 216-227.
.
Mehan, H., Hertweck, A., & Meihls, J. L. (1986). Handicapping the handicapped: Decision making in students' educational careers. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press. -- chapter 6 included in reading packet
.
Michal-Smith, H. (1987). Presidential address 1987: Hollywood's portrayal of disability. Mental Retardation, 25(5), 259-266.
.
Patton, J. M. (1998). The disproportionate representation of African Americans in special education: Looking behind the curtain for understanding and solutions. The Journal of Special Education, 32(1), 25-31.
.
Patton, J. M., & Townsend, B. L. (2000). Ethics, power, and privilege: Neglected considerations in the education of African American learners with special needs. Teacher Education and Special Education, 22(4), 276-286.
.
Phillips, M. J. (1992). "Try harder": The experience of disability and the dilemma of normalization. In P. M. Ferguson & D. L. Ferguson & S. J. Taylor (Eds.), Interpreting disability: A qualitative reader (pp. 213-227). New York: Teachers College Press.
.
Poplin, M. S. (1987). Self-imposed blindness: The scientific method in education. Remedial and Special Education, 8(6), 31-37.
.
Poplin, M. S. (1988a). Holistic/constructivist principles of the teaching/learning process: Implications for the field of learning disabilities. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(7), 401-416.
.
Poplin, M. S. (1988b). The reductionistic fallacy in learning disabilities: Replicating the past by reducing the present. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(7), 389-400.
.
Poplin, M., & Phillips, L. (1993). Sociocultural aspects of language and literacy: Issues facing educators of students with learning disabilities. Learning Disability Quarterly, 16(4), 245-255.
..
Reid, D. K. (1988). Reflections on the pragmatics of a paradigm shift. Journal of Learning Disabilities, 21(7), 417-420.
..
Rist, R. C. (2000). HER Classic: Student social class and teacher expectations: The self-fulfilling prophecy in ghetto education. Harvard Educational Review, 70(3), 266-301.
.
Safran, S. P. (1998). The first century of disability portrayal in film: An Analysis of the literature. The Journal of Special Education, 31, 467-479.
..
Safran, S. P. (2000). Using movies to teach students about disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(3), 43-47.
..
Salend, S. (1999). The impact of inclusion on students with and without disabilities and their educators. Remedial and Special Education, 20(2), 114-126.
.
Shannon, P. (1995). Text, lies, and videotape. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. -- chapter 1 included in reading packet
.
Skrtic, T. M. (1991b). The special education paradox: Equity as the way to excellence. Harvard Educational Review, 61(2), 148-206.
.
Sleeter, C. (1987). Literacy, definitions of learning disabilities, and social control. In B. M. Franklin (Ed.), Learning disabilities: Dissenting essays (pp. 67-87). London: The Falmer Press.
.
Townsend, B. L., & Patton, J. M. (2000). Reflecting on ethics, power, and privilege. Teacher Education and Special Education, 23(1), 32-34.
.
Trueba, H., Jacobs, L., & Kirton, E. (1990). Cultural conflict and adaptation: The case of Hmong children in American society. New York: The Falmer Press. -- chapter 1 included in reading packet
.
Utley, C. A., Delquadri, J. C., Obiakor, F. E., & Mims, V. A. (2000). General and special educators' perceptions of teaching strategies for multicultural students. Teacher Education and Special Education, 23(1), 34-50.
.
Zola, I. K. (1992). "Any distinguishing features": The portrayal of disability in the crime-mystery genre. In P. M. Ferguson & D. L. Ferguson & S. J. Taylor (Eds.), Interpreting disability: A qualitative reader (pp. 233-250). New York: Teachers College Press.

---


Other Recommended Readings
.
Ferguson, P. M., Ferguson, D. L., & Taylor, S. J. (Eds.). (1992). Interpreting disability: A qualitative reader. New York: Teachers College Press.
.
Goode, D. (1994). A world without words: The social construction of children born deaf and blind. Philadelphia, PA: Temple University Press.
.
Gould, S. J. (1981). The mismeasure of man. New York: W. W. Norton and Company.
.
Harry, B. (1994). The disproportionate representation of minority students in special education: Theories and recommendations. Alexandria, VA: National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
..
Kozol, J. (1991). Savage Inequalities: Children in America's schools. New York: Crown Publishers.
.
Oakes, J. (1985). Keeping track: How schools structure inequality. New Haven, CN: Yale University Press.
.
Poplin, M. S., & Cousin, P. T. (Eds.). (1996). Alternative views of learning disabilities: Issues for the 21st century. Austin, TX: PRO-ED.
.
Skrtic, T. M. (1991a). Behind special education: A critical analysis of professional culture and school organization. Denver, CO: Love Publishing.
.
Skrtic, T. M. (Ed.). (1995). Disability and democracy: Reconstructing [special] education for postmodernity. New York: Teachers College Press.
.
Taylor, D. (1991). Learning denied. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
.


---

Course Design:
This course is designed so that students will interact actively with the course material -- whole and small group discussion, rather than instructor lecture, will make up the bulk of in-class sessions. Therefore, it is imperative that students arrive at each class having read all of the assigned readings. Graded assignments are designed to be instructional as well as providing a means of arriving at a final grade for each student. Therefore, emphasis will be placed on graded out-of-class assignments that rely on interpretation of course materials and development of critical thinking. Students who require special accommodations or instructional modifications need to notify the instructor by the beginning of the semester, or as soon as difficulties become apparent, with appropriate documentation from the Learning Support Services Center (277-6670).

---

Specific Course Requirements
Descriptions of and criteria for grading each assignment will be handed out in class. Extra copies can be obtained at the instructor's web site -- http://www.unm.edu/~devalenz/
 

Assignments: 1) film review essay 2) book review essay 3) quick writes (2 points each) 4) final essay drafts (7 points each) 5) final essay

Points Possible: 20 points 20 points 20 points 14 points 25 points

The total points possible for all of the above assignments add up to 99 points. The final point will be added to the student's grade at the instructor's discretion for any assignment that goes significantly above and beyond the work of other students. This allows the instructor to assign a grade of 'A+' only in the case of the student fulfilling the stated requirements for all assignments, attending all class sessions (or making up those missed) AND performing clearly superior work on at least one assignment.

Evaluation Procedures:
Grading System:  Final grades will be determined by a point system (X out of 100 total possible points). Fractionated grading will be used, with the following breakdown:

A+ = 100                B+ = 88-89           C+ = 78-79
A = 94-99              B = 84-87            C = 74-77
A- = 90-93             B- = 80-83          F = below 74*

*Please note that, according to UNM regulations, graduate students may not be assigned a grade of C-, D+, D, or D-. Therefore, graduate students who do not accumulate a minimum of 74 points by the end of the semester will be assigned an F.

Incompletes and withdraws at the end of the semester will be allowed only in accordance with UNM policies. Please see the UNM catalog for a description of these policies.

Written directions for all assignments will be provided, along with the criteria for determining point values. Extra copies of assignments will be available at the instructor’s web site at: http://www.unm.edu/~devalenz/ All written assignments will be expected to be typed and follow the American Psychological Association Manual (4th ed.) format, unless otherwise specified. A brief guide to APA is also available on the instructor's web site, under the "handouts" link.

Late Paper Policy: Late assignments will receive a one (1) point deduction for every day late, with a limit of seven days allowed. If assignments are not turned in within 1 week of the assigned date, they will not be accepted, except in the case of significant illness (doctor's note required) or family emergency. If you will be not be able to be in class, please arrange for a friend to turn in your assignment during class, have the assignment faxed to the special education office by the time/date due, or have it handed in in person to either Terri or Jo in the Special Education office (Hokona Hall 273) prior to 5 p.m. on the date due. If your assignment will be turned in at the Special Education office, please make sure that the time and date it is received are documented by the staff. Do NOT put late assignments under my office door, unless you want them accepted as turned in on the day I find them, which may or may not be the same day as you turned them in. Since I am not at the university every day, this could cost you points.

Re-Writes: In order to be fair to all students, re-writes will not be allowed, except under extraordinary circumstances, beyond the student's control. However, students are STRONGLY encouraged to talk with, e-mail questions to, and/or submit drafts to the instructor at least 1-2 weeks ahead of time, so that revisions can be made, if necessary, by the assigned due date.

Class Attendance & Participation Policies: Class attendance is mandatory - 5 points will be deducted for every absence that is not made up. No more than 4 class sessions in a semester can be made up. Students who miss more than 4 class sessions will be dropped from the course. Missed class sessions can be made up with the following, turned in no later than 3 weeks after the missed class:

• a typed summary of all assigned readings for the class missed, including a response to all reading questions,
• a photocopy of a colleague's notes from the missed class, and
• a typed response to the assigned quick write (available on the instructor's web site, under 'class outlines').

Late arrivals to class interrupt the learning of all students. Therefore, a point will be deducted for arriving more than 15 minutes late to class. Arriving more than 45 minutes late will be considered a class absence and will need to be made up, as indicated above.

Class participation that is conducive to the learning of all course participants is expected. Behaviors that are considered to be conducive to learning (of the student him/herself and others) include:

• arriving to class on time and well-prepared,
• paying attention to instructor and/or other students when they are speaking,
• use of appropriate and non-offensive language during class and in written class assignments,
• demonstrating cooperation with and respect for the instructor and peers during class discussions,
• actively participating, on-topic, during small group activities,
• and showing consideration for other students' need for alternative teaching strategies.

A rubric indicating the instructor's expectations for appropriate classroom participation will be distributed at the beginning of the course. Students who repeatedly violate these expectations will be dropped from the course.
.

---

.
.
.TENTATIVE Class Schedule:
..
January 16, 2001 (#1)
Topic: Introduction - Instructor’s vision, expectations and classroom norms, assignments & grading criteria, and course web site resources
Read: no reading due on the 1st class
.
January 23, 2001 (#2)
Topic: Introducing theoretical frameworks
Read: Jones (1996) AND Rhodes (1998)
.
January 30, 2001 (#3)
Topic: Introducing the sociology of disability
Read: Bogdan & Knoll (1995)

Note: February 2nd is the last day to drop courses in order to receive refund/credit

February 6, 2001 (#4)
Topic: Comparing and contrasting paradigms and considering legitimizing myths
Read:  Mercer (1992) AND Taylor & Bogdan (1980)
Due:   1st draft of final essay
.
February 13, 2001 (#5)
Topic: Exploring images in the media
Read:

• Cortés (1995)
• Gartner (1982)
• Bogdan, Biklen, Shapiro & Spelkoman (1982)
• Safran (1998)

Due:   Watch "Something About Mary" prior to this class
.
February 20, 2001 (#6)
Topic: Intersecting critical theory and the social construction of disability
Read: Harlan & Robert (1998)
Due:   Film review essay

.
.
Note: last day to drop a class without a grade is February 23rd

February 27, 2001 (#7)
Topic: Why do we keep talking about race, class and gender?
Read: Darling-Hammond (1995) AND de Valenzuela, Connery, & Musanti (2000)
**mid-semester class evaluation (how is it going so far?)
.
March 6, 2001 (#8)
Topic: Mental retardation
Read: Ferguson (1987), AND Luckasson, et al (1997), AND Luckasson (2000)
..
March 13, 2001 (#9)
No Class -- UNM Spring Break
.
March 20, 2001 (#10)
Topic: The process of socially constructing disability
Read:

• Danforth & Navarro (1998)
• Peter (2000)
• Taylor (2000)
• Danforth (2000)
• Gelb (2000)

.
March 27, 2001 (#11)
Topic: Institutional involvement in constructing disabilities
Read: Rao (2000) AND Mehan, Hertweck, & Meihls (1986) -- chapter 7
Due: second draft of final essay
.
April 3, 2001 (#12)
Topic: Personal perspectives of disability
Read: Bogdan (1980) AND Goode (1992)
.
April 10, 2001 (#13)
Topic: What does the social construction of disability imply about inclusion?
Read: Taylor (1988) AND Stainback & Stainback (1984)
Due: book essay

Note: April 13th is the last day to withdraw from a course without Dean's approval (WP/WF required).

April 17, 2001 (#14)
Topic: Approaches to reform
Read: Rueda (1989) AND  Wiest & Kreil (1995)
.
April 24, 2001 (#15)
Topic: Approaches to reform, cont.
Read:  Sleeter (1986) AND Danforth & Rhodes (1987)
.
May 1, 2001 (#16)
Topic: Approaches to reform, cont.
Read:  Figueroa (1999) AND McLaren (1994) - Chapter 5

Note: May 4th is the last day to withdraw from a course with Dean's approval (WP/WF required)

May 8, 2001 -- Finals week
NO CLASS
Due: final essay -- LAST time to turn in this assignment is 7:15 p.m., Tuesday, May 8, 2001.
.

---

Instructor's vision and mission statement

VISION: A classroom climate that fosters thoughtful and respectful consideration of alternative viewpoints and ideas, personal ownership of learning, and individual construction of personally meaningful knowledge.

MISSION: To facilitate the collaborative construction of the above learning environment via attention to the following:

whole and small group dynamics;
increased literacy in academic discourse (comprehension and production, oral and written); and
opportunities for active engagement with course content and materials.

---

.
The vision of the College of Education:
.
Excellence and diversity through people, ideas, and innovation.

Our mission is the study and practice of education through teaching, research, and service. We

• address critical education issues;
• test new ideas and approaches to teaching and learning;
• educate professionals who can facilitate human growth and development in schools, homes, communities, and workplaces, and
• prepare students for participation in a complex and challenging society.

 In carrying out our mission we value

• excellence in all that we do;
• diversity of people and perspectives;
• relationships of service, accountability, collaboration, and advocacy;
• the discovery, discussion, and dissemination of ideas, and innovation in teaching, technology, and leadership

---

College of Education's Conceptual Framework:
Professional Understandings, Practices, and Identities

The College of Education at the University of New Mexico believes that professional education should seek to help individuals develop professional understandings, practices, and identities. These understandings, practices and identities frame the life-long learning of professional educators and reflect the values articulated in our Mission Statement and in state and national standards and competencies.

Understandings frame the identity and practice of educational professional. We seek to help you better understand:

• Human Growth and Development

Patterns in how individuals develop physically, emotionally, and intellectually. How to provide conditions that promote the growth and learning of individuals from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds, including those with special learning needs.
 
• Culture and Language

The nature of home, school, community, workplace, state, national, and global contexts for learning. How social groups develop and function and the dynamics of power within and among them. How language and other forms of expression reflect cultural assumptions yet can be used to evoke social change. How one's own background and development shape understanding and interaction.
 
• Content of the Disciplines

The substance of the disciplines you teach -- the central organizing concepts and factual information -- and the ways in which new information is created, including the forms of creative investigation that characterize the work of scholars and artists.
 
• Pedagogy

Theory and research on effective educational practice. How to create contexts for learning in and across the disciplines. How to assess student learning and design, plan, and implement instruction to meet the needs of learners. How to evaluate educational practice.
 
• Technology

Effects of media and technology on knowledge, communication, and society. How to critically analyze and raise awareness of the impact of media and technology. How to use current technology.
 
• Professional Issues

The social and political influences on education, both historically and currently. Local, state, and national policies, including requirements and standards. How to critically analyze and participate in the formation of educational policy. Strategies for leadership, collaboration, and research.
 
• Nature of Knowledge

How knowledge is constructed within social contexts, including the academic disciplines. The differences and connections among the knowledge constructed in different social contexts. How to conduct inquiry into the nature of knowledge within and across the disciplines.

These understandings enable you, as a professional, to value and engage in practices that embody the following qualities:
.

• Learner-Centered

Students' past experiences, cultural backgrounds, interests, capabilities, and understandings are accommodated in learning experiences. Routines promote learner risk-taking and allow learners to take increasing control of their own learning and functioning.
 
• Contextual

Experiences engage learners in ways of thinking, doing, talking, writing, reading, etc., that are indicative of the discipline(s) and/or authentic social contexts. Ideas and practices are presented with the richness of their contextual cues and information. Learners are provided with models and opportunities to reflect on their experiences and to relate their learning to other social contexts.
 
• Coherent

Learning experiences are organized around the development of concepts and strategies that learners need in order to participate in other similar situations. Learners are assessed on what they had to opportunity to learn.
 
• Culturally Responsive

Diversity is valued, and learners are helped to become aware of the impact of culture on how they and others perceive the world.
 
• Technologically Current

Available technology facilitates learning. Learners are helped to understand the effect of media on their perceptions and communication.

Developing a professional identity is central to lifelong growth as a professional educator. The University of New Mexico College of Education will help you to develop the following attributes of a professional:

• Caring

Attentive to learners, willingness to listen and withhold judgment, and ability to empathize while maintaining high expectations for learner success.
 
• Advocacy

Committed to ensuring equitable treatment and nurturing environments for all learners.
 
• Inquisitiveness

Habitual inquiry into the many, ever-changing ways in which knowledge is constructed, how people learn, and how educators can support learning.
 
• Reflection-in-Action

Able to analyze, assess and revise practice in light of student learning, research and theory, and collegial feedback.
 
• Communication

Skilled in speaking, writing, and using other modes of expression.
 
• Collaboration

Able to work cooperatively with students, parents, community members, and colleagues.
 
• Ethical Behavior

Aware of and able to work within the ethical codes of the profession.

TOP

Last updated: January 3, 2001