Judith Herb College of Education

Welcome

/education/

Follow Us





Contact Us

Department of Educational Foundations & Leadership
The University of Toledo
Main Campus
Gillham Hall, 5th floor
mapGoogle maps
carGuest parking 

 

Mailing address:
The University of Toledo
Main Campus
MS 921
Toledo, OH 43606-3390

Department Secretary:
Ruth Ann Easterwood
Gillham Hall Room 5000
419.530.2461
ruthann.easterwood@
utoledo.edu

Staff Webpage


Interim Chair
Dr. Gregory Stone
Gillham Hall Room 5400-M
gregory.stone@utoledo.edu

Recommended Readings For Theory and Social Foundations (TSOC) Doctoral Degrees

Approved by TSOC Wing Faculty, January 2007 with revisions May 2007

University of Toledo
Judith Herb College of Education
Department of Foundations of Education

Objectives, Comprehensive Examinations, and
Recommended Readings

For

Theory and Social Foundations (TSOC) Doctoral Degrees

in

Educational Sociology (FEES),
Foundations of Education (FOED),
History of Education (FEHE),
 and
Philosophy of Education (FEPE)

INTRODUCTION

          
Education is a process of exploring the logical structure of the disciplines of knowledge. At the core of the logical structure of a discipline is inquiry, in terms of the questions it asks, the methods of inquiry it employs, its standards of epistemological validity, and the paradigm(s) (i.e., dominant theories) that constitute its achievements. Through exposure to the structure of a discipline, a student acquires the ways of thinking that inhere in its logical structure. Thus, a basic principle:  a major exam should be based upon the logical structure of the discipline, as articulated within the University of Toledo’s department through its goals and objectives. 
This document is an elaboration of, and is consistent with, the “Outline of a Revised Student Assessment System in the Ph.D. Program in Foundations of Education,” approved by the FOED Department Faculty, January 20, 2006.  As such, it lays out the Goals and Objectives of the TSOC Doctoral Programs, the Process (with Timeline) for preparing and writing the Major and Minor Exams including the processes for notification and reporting of results and for retaking failed exams, the Major and Minor Exam content, and the rubrics that will be used by TSOC Faculty in assessing the exams.

GOALS

 The program in TSOC has the following as goals for all students in its programs:

• Students will be mentored into professional life, knowing what their chosen profession involves and having opportunity to develop the behaviors, skills, and dispositions necessary to it.
• Students will become competent members of their disciplines, equipped to conduct valid and meaningful research, to contribute to its knowledge base, and also excited about grappling with old and new ideas.
• Students will be able to incorporate their lived biographies into, and to use resistance against, disciplinary academic discourse in order to participate in transformative experiences.
• Students will nurture and develop their abilities to take multiple perspectives, to step back from their own finely-honed beliefs, and to accept the validity of others’ experiences and beliefs that may conflict with their own.

OBJECTIVES

The TSOC Doctoral Programs in Educational Sociology (FEES), Foundations of Education (FOED), History of Education (FEHE), and Philosophy of Education (FEPE) share the following Learning Objectives.  The Doctoral student who has successfully completed coursework and is ready to take her/his Major Examination will be able to:

    1. Comprehend the disciplinary content of the major area of study through citation of major and other scholarship as included both in the departmental reading lists and in the additional reading particular to the student.
    2. Portray the disciplinary content of the minor area of study through citation of major and other scholarship as included both in the departmental reading lists and in the additional reading particular to the student.
    3. Illustrate an understanding of the place of the major and minor fields of study in the overall discipline(s) of Foundations of Education with appropriate references (citations), in writing and orally, the historical and contemporary development and purposes of the field of Foundations of Education.
    4. Analyze and interpret the place of Social Foundations of Education in relation to the larger fields of Educational Research and Teacher Education with appropriate references (citations), in writing and orally, the historical and contemporary development and purposes of the field of Foundations of Education, and the key arguments developed to support its importance in Colleges of Education.
    5. Compare, contrast, apply, defend, and critique a minimum of three theoretical perspectives through written and oral explanations of (1) the basic theoretical model or lens, with citations of key explanations, both historical and contemporary, of how and why the theory was developed, and (2) example(s) of the usefulness of the theory in explaining phenomena of importance in educational research.
    6. Depict particular research methodologies and be able to implement and to critique when they are most appropriate to use (i.e., with what research problems or questions).
    7. Analyze and interpret research data, of at least two of the following types:  quantitative, qualitative, historical, and philosophical argument.
    8. Demonstrate the knowledge and skill necessary for theory development and theoretical analysis by (1) taking a particular phenomena and explaining what theoretical lens(es) would be most relevant and why, (2) applying the theory to analyzing a data sample, and (3) defending the validity or appropriateness in using the chosen theory to analyze the sample data.
    9. Articulate and defend conclusions drawn from empirical research and theoretical analysis.
    10. Create, articulate and implement original educational research (quantitative, qualitative, historical, and/or theoretical) by writing a well-developed research plan, with all the conventional components of a proposal and with citations relevant to topic, problem, and methodology. 

MAJOR EXAM

The TSOC Major Doctoral Examinations in Educational Sociology (FEES), Foundations of Education (FOED), History of Education (FEHE), and Philosophy of Education (FEPE) are intended to demonstrate proficiency in the following Learning Domains:

    1. Mastery of the disciplinary content of the major area of study.
    2. Mastery of the disciplinary content of the minor area of study.
    3. Understanding of the place of one’s major and minor fields of study in the overall discipline(s) of Foundations of Education.
    4. Ability to articulate and defend various theoretical perspectives.
    5. Knowledge of and skill in the identification and implementation of research methodologies.
    6. Ability to analyze and interpret research data, of at least two of the following types:  quantitative, qualitative, historical, and philosophical argument.
    7. Knowledge of and skill in theory development and theoretical analysis.
    8. Ability to articulate and defend conclusions drawn from empirical research and theoretical analysis.
    9. Knowledge of and skill in the articulation and implementation of original educational research (quantitative, qualitative, historical, and/or theoretical).

The TSOC Major Doctoral Examination in Educational Sociology (FEES), Foundations of Education (FOED), History of Education (FEHE), or Philosophy of Education (FEPE) will consist of three parts as described below.  It is recommended that students plan ahead with their advisors to complete the exam process in one semester.  The following schedule is recommended as the norm for accomplishing the written and oral portions of the exam, and faculty will be prepared to arrange time according to this schedule.  The advisor and faculty will make every reasonable effort, however, to accommodate individual students’ scheduling needs.  The recommended schedule is as follows:

 Week 1: 

  1. Student consults with major advisor to confirm that s/he is ready for the major exam process, i.e., that they agree on the question for Part I and that the student has the necessary background to answer it, and that the student has completed or can shortly complete the article for Part II;
  2. Student consults with minor advisor to confirm readiness for minor exam, and to determine the requirements and scheduling for the minor exam;
  3. Student and advisor consult with Program Committee Members to determine an oral exam date (sometime during weeks 12-15);
  4. Student submits paperwork necessary to take the major, minor, and oral exams (see JHCOE Doctoral Programs Handbook).

Week 8: 

Parts I and II of Major Exam are DUE TO ADVISOR ON OR BEFORE FRIDAY OF THIS WEEK.

Week 10: 

TSOC Faculty’s evaluations (using rubrics) of Parts I and II of Major Exam are due Friday of this week.  Advisor summarizes comments on Exam from TSOC Faculty in a written memo to student, stating whether the exam is a pass or fail and providing formative feedback according to the assessment rubrics’ components as to the strengths and weaknesses of the exam.  Advisor files form indicating result of exam (pass or fail) with the Graduate Program.  If the student does not pass these parts, the Oral Exam is cancelled & process repeated in a future semester.  As specified by the Graduate Program, the written Major Exam can be retaken XXX times.

Weeks 2-11: 

Minor Exam requirements are completed in minor department/program.  Minor Exam must be passed before Oral Exam can take place.

Weeks 12-15: 

Part III, the Oral Exam, takes place and is evaluated.


Part I:  General Discipline Question

The intent of this question is that a student focusing on sociology of education, for example, will demonstrate an understanding of the historical, philosophical, and cultural contexts of social problems.  Likewise, a student focusing on philosophy of education will demonstrate an understanding of the historical and cultural contexts of philosophical views, as well as an ability to apply understanding to sociological problems.  Similarly, a student of the history of education will demonstrate an understanding of the philosophical stances influencing actions and events in given historical eras, or perhaps an understanding of how history as story is shaped by the historian’s philosophical understandings, as well as sophisticated understanding of historical events through lenses of sociology and/or anthropology.  Likewise, a Foundations of Education student who is most interested in cultural questions will be able to place these in relation to philosophical, historical, and sociological questions.  The student’s task, therefore, is to demonstrate an integrated understanding of the various disciplinary approaches that taken together constitute Social Foundations of Education; however, it is expected that each student will focus this Part I on the disciplinary approach with which s/he is most familiar (e.g., sociology, anthropology, philosophy, OR history), and will contextualize this approach within two or three other disciplinary approaches.

Each student will complete and submit a paper articulating and defending a detailed answer to an individualized version of the following question:

What is the meaning of a “Foundations” (including the disciplines of sociology, anthropology, history, and/or philosophy) perspective, and what is the significance of a “Foundations” perspective for an understanding of educational theory, policy, and/or practice? 

The specific question will be written by the student’s advisor, with reference to the student’s portfolio, and in discussion with the student and TSOC faculty members.  The question will be contextualized and developed according to themes and topics relevant to the particular student-examinee’s work.  The specific, individualized question will be circulated with the student’s answer for assessment.
 This should be a scholarly essay, with a well-developed, creative yet grounded argument, found in its thesis statement and structural development.  It should include scholarly citations, in a recognized scholarly format (e.g., APA, Chicago, etc.), including works studied in courses but also reading in the field beyond coursework, demonstrating familiarity with both past and contemporary work in the field. Relevant readings on the reading lists provided by the department should be included; however, students should show initiative and demonstrate their particular interests by including readings beyond these lists.

 

Part II: Paper

The student will submit one single-authored, “polished” paper, of quality to be submitted to a journal appropriate to the major field of studies.  It is suggested, though not required, that this paper relate to the dissertation topic and serve as a foundation for the dissertation proposal.  The paper should be approximately 20 pages in length exploring in depth a topic and/or a question pertinent to the discipline. This paper will include significant citations and discussion that indicate how the writer positions her/himself within the scholarly discourse on the topic or question.  Components should include: a researchable question; a review of the literature; a rational and discussion of the problem/issue’s context and history; a methodology, evaluative procedure; discussion; conclusions; suggestions for additional study and research; evidence that the student has read and understands readings from a prescribed list of readings.   The student, in consultation with the advisor, will determine the topic. The paper may lead to the dissertation topic.  In preparing this paper, it is recommended that the student identify an actual journal to which s/he will submit the paper, and refer to that journal’s “guidelines for submission,” “editorial policies,” and examples of articles published (their genre, content, format) in preparing her/his paper. It is suggested, though not required, that the student provide a brief cover letter to the paper, specifying to which scholarly journal s/he expects to submit the paper, and why s/he believes the paper is appropriate to the submission guidelines of that journal.     


Part III: Oral Examination

The student will orally defend Parts I and II before the members of their Doctoral Program Committee.   This will be a critical part of the overall performance.  The student will be expected to answer specific questions about their writing in Parts I and II, without recourse to reading from those documents.  The student should also be prepared to talk knowledgeably about their major and minor fields in general, as well as the overall field of social foundations, its place in educational research and teacher preparation, current issues in the field, and implications of the field for contemporary issues in education and schooling.  In particular, the student will be expected to

• Cite specific authors and their works fluently, demonstrating depth and breadth of knowledge
• Discuss complex concepts, integrating references to others’ work with their own original thought



TSOC MINOR/COGNATE EXAM

The minor serves as cognate, meaning it is intended to complement and inform the major discipline, both in general and in terms of the specialization.  The TSOC Minor Doctoral Examinations in Educational Sociology (FEES), Foundations of Education (FOED), History of Education (FEHE), and Philosophy of Education (FEPE) consist of the following:
Each TSOC Minor/Cognate student will complete and submit a paper articulating and defending a detailed answer to an individualized version of the following question:

What is the meaning of a “Foundations” (including the disciplines of sociology, anthropology, history, and/or philosophy) perspective, and what is the significance of a “Foundations” perspective for an understanding of educational theory, policy, and/or practice in your [the student-examinee’s] Major discipline?

The specific question will be written by the student’s advisor, with reference to the student’s portfolio, and in discussion with the student and TSOC faculty members.  The question will be contextualized and developed according to themes and topics relevant to the particular student-examinee’s work. Questions will be contextualized according to the student-examinee’s major and specialization, as well as themes relevant to the particular student-examinee’s work and interests.  For instance, the question might begin (these are merely examples):

  • “The question of faculty rights and academic freedom is central to faculty governance in higher education.  Please consider these issues from a philosophical base, addressing the major questions that philosophers of education generally address as well as questions specific to the study of human rights…,” or,
  • “Teachers at all grade levels face the challenge of meeting externally-set standards designed largely as gatekeeping forces, while preparing their students to be full citizen-participants in a democratic society….” or,
  • “Administrators need to be able to make decisions based on their understanding of the purposes of schooling in the larger society.  Sociological theories have been developed to frame issues and focus on what particular approaches assume about the roles of different stakeholders, the purposes of schooling, and the power differentials within the larger society.  Please discuss three sociological theories that you find useful in considering an issue you will face as an administrator, and then suggest which you find to be the most appropriate for framing decisions you will need to make in your profession….”

This should be a scholarly essay, with a well-developed, creative yet grounded argument, found in its thesis statement and structural development.  It should include scholarly citations, in APA, Chicago, or some other accepted format, including works studied in TSOC courses and some reading beyond TSOC coursework in order to develop the particular focus (comprehensive knowledge of a field is not expected): it is expected that each student will focus on the disciplinary approach with which s/he is most familiar (e.g., sociology, anthropology, philosophy, OR history), and MAY  contextualize this disciplinary approach within one or two other disciplinary approaches.  Relevant readings on the reading lists provided by the department should be included. 


 
RECOMMENDING READINGS LIST
(Updated May 2007)

 This listing has been prepared by TSOC Faculty to reflect classic and contemporary scholarly work in the field.  It is not intended to be comprehensive, but rather to serve as suggestions for the type and scope of work that a Ph.D. student might be expected to be familiar with.  Another good source is the Critics Choice Awards list prepared by the American Educational Studies Association (AESA) annually, as well, of course, as current journals in the field.

Anyon, J. (2005). Radical possibilities: Public policy, urban education and a new social movement.  New York: Routledge.

Anderson, J. (1988). The Education of Blacks in the South: 1860-1935. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.

Apple, M. (2001). Ideology and curriculum. New York, London: Falmer Press.  Or other work by Apple.

Banks, J. (DATE). Teaching strategies for ethnic studies. (8th ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Bennett de Marrais, K. & LeCompte, M. (DATE). The way schools work.

Bowles, S., & Gintis, H. (1976). Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life. New York: Basic Books.

Bourdieu, P. (1984). Distinction: A social critique of the judgment of taste. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  Or other work by Bourdieu.

Bowers, C. (1984). The Promise of Theory

Cazden, C., & Mehan, H. (1989). Principles for sociology and anthropology: Context, code, classroom, and culture.  In C. Cazden & H. Mehan (Eds.), Knowledge base for the beginning teacher (Ch. 5).  New York, NY: Pergamon.

Cecelski, D. Along Freedom Road. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.

Cleveland, D. A Long Way to Go

Counts, G. (1978 [1932]). Dare the school build a new social order? Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.

———. (1934). The Social Foundations of Education. New York: C. Scribner's Sons.

Delpit, L. (1995). Other people’s children: Cultural conflict in the classroom. New York: The New Press.

Dewey, J. (1916). Democracy and Education: An Introduction to the Philosophy of Education, Text-Book Series in Education. New York: Macmillan. And/or other works by Dewey.

———. (1956). Experience and Education. New York: MacMillan.

DuBois, W. (1986). [1903]. The souls of black folk, in W.E.B. DuBois: Writings.   New York: The Library of America.

Edwards, M. et al. (2002). The education of Hispanic/Latino students in Toledo.  Toledo, OH: Urban Affairs Center. http://uac.utoledo.edu/Publications/latino-ed-attainment.pdf

Fine, M. (1991). Framing dropouts: Notes on the politics of an urban public high school.  Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Foucault, M. (1979). Discipline and Punish:  The Birth of the Prison. New York: Vintage.

Fordham, S. Blacked out.

Freire, P. (1994). Pedagogy of Hope

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the Oppressed. New York: Continuum.

Gilman, C. Herland or “The Yellow Wallpaper”

Giroux, H. (1997). Pedagogy and the politics of hope: Theory, culture, and schooling. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.  Or other work by Giroux.

Gollnick, D. & Chinn, P. (2006). Multicultural education in a pluralistic society. (4th ed.). Columbus, OH: Merrill.

Gore, J.M. (1993). The struggle for pedagogies: Critical and feminist discourses as regimes of truth. London: Routledge.

Gossett, T. Race: The History of an Idea in America

Gutmann, A. (1999). Democratic Education. (Rev. ed.). Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

Hamer, L. (1999) Folklore in schools and multicultural education: Toward
institutionalizing non-instuitutional knowledge. The Journal of American Folklore, 447.

Heath, S. (1983). Ways with words: Language, life and work in communities and classrooms. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press.

hooks, b. (1994). Teaching to transgress: Education as the practice of freedom. New York: Routledge. And/Or other work by hooks.

Hughes, S. A. (2006).  Black Hands in the Biscuits Not in the Classrooms: Unveiling
 Hope in a Struggle for Brown's Promise. Peter Lang Press.

Karier, C. (1986). The Individual, Society, and Education: A History of American Educational Ideas. (2nd ed.). Urbana: University of Illinois Press.

Kozol, J.  Any work.

Kransdorf, M. (1994). A matter of loyalty: The Los Angeles School Board vs. Frances Eisenberg.  San Francisco, CA: Caddo Gap Press.

Ladson-Billings, G. (1994). The dreamkeepers: Successful teachers of African American students. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.  Or other work by Ladson-Billings, such as (1995) Toward a theory of culturally relevant pedagogy. American Educational Research Journal, 32(3): 465-491.

Lather, P. (1991). Getting Smart: Feminist Research and Pedagogy with/in the Postmodern. New York: Routledge.

Leistyna, P., Woodrum, A., & Sherlbom, S. (Eds.). (1996). Breaking free: The transformative power of critical pedagogy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Lemert, C. Social Theory

Maher, F.A. & Thompson Tetreault, M.K. (1994). The feminist classroom. New York: Basic Books.

Maritain, J. (1943). Education at the Crossroads, The Terry Lectures. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Martin, R. (DATE) Practicing what we teach.

---. (DATE). …  Vega Model

McCarthy, M. (2006). The rise and fall of ED200F. Educational Studies 39(2): 134-145.

McLaren, P. (DATE). Life in schools

Moll, L., & Gonzalez, N. (2003). Engaging life: A funds of knowledge approach to multicultural education. In J. Banks & C. Banks (Eds.), Handbook of Multicultural Education. New York: Jossey-Bass.  Or other work by them, such as Gonzalez, N. (1995). The funds of knowledge for teaching project.  Practicing Anthropology, 17: 3-6. 

Nieto, S. (2004). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. Boston, MA: Pearson/Allyn & Bacon

Noblit, G. and Dempsey, V. The Social Construction of Virtue

Noddings, N. (1984). Caring:  A Feminine Approach to Ethics and Moral Education. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Nussbaum, M. (1997). Cultivating Humanity: A Classical Defense of Reform in Liberal Education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Orr, D. (1992). Ecological Literacy:  Education and the Transition to a Postmodern World. Edited by David Ray Griffin, Suny Series in Constructive Postmodern Thought. Albany: State University of New York Press.

Payne, R.  …poverty…

Plato. (1979). The Republic. Translated by R. Larson. Arlington Heights, IL: Harlan Davidson.

Reardon, B. (1988). Comprehensive Peace Education: Educating for Global Responsibility. New York: Teachers College Press.

Rousseau, J. (1979). Emile, or On Education. Translated by Allan Bloom. New York: Basic Books.

Shujaa, M.K. (1994). Too Much Schooling Too Little Education.

Siddle Walker, V. (1996). Their Highest Potential. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press.

Sleeter, C. (1996). Multicultural education as social activism. New York: SUNY Press.

Sleeter, C. Un-standardizing Curriculum

Snauwaert, D. (1993). Democracy, Education, and Governance: A Developmental Conception.  Albany, NY: SUNY Press.

Snyder, S., & Tavel, D. (1992). To learning's fount : Jesup W. Scott High School, 1913-1988: The first seventy-five years.  Toledo, OH.

Tobin, J., Wu, D., and Davidson, D. (1989). Preschool in three cultures: Japan, China, and the United States. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.

Tozer, Steven, Paul Violas, & Guy Senese. (2006). School and society: Historical and contemporary perspectives. 5th ed. Boston, MA: McGraw-Hill.

Tozer, S., & Miretzky, D. (2000). Professional teaching standards and social foundations of education.” Educational Studies 31(2): 106-119.

Tyack, D. (1974). The one best system: A history of American urban education.  Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Valenzuela, A. Subtractive Schooling

Watras, J. (2006). Teacher tests, equal opportunity, and the Foundations of Education. Educational Studies 39(2): 124-134.

Weis, L., & Fine, M. (2004). Working method: Research and social justice. New York: Routledge.

West, C. (1993). Race matters. Boston: Beacon Press.

Whitehead, A. (1929). The Aims of Education & Other Essays. New York: The Macmillan.


 

Last Updated: 6/26/15