HMEF5023_V2: Assignment/Sept2015

FACULTY OF EDUCATION AND LANGUAGES________________________________________________________________________

HMEF5023_V2EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP SEPTEMBER SEMESTER 2015

ASSIGNMENT ________________________________________________________________________

INSTRUCTIONS TO STUDENTS1. This assignment contains questions set in English.

2. Your assignment should be typed using 12 point Times New Roman font and double spacing.

3. You must submit your hardcopy assignment to your Facilitator and ON-LINE via the MyVLE. For the online student, you are to submit a softcopy of your assignment via MyVLE and another softcopy to the facilitator via e-mail. Refer to the portal for instructions on the procedures to submit your assignment on-line. You are advised to keep a copy of your submitted assignment and proof of the submission for personal reference. Your assignment must be submitted on 6-8 November 2015 (4th Seminar). 4. Your assignment should be prepared individually. You should not copy another persons assignment. You should also not plagiarise another persons work as your own.

EVALUATIONThis assignment accounts for 60% of the total marks for the course.

OBJECTIVE

The assignment is focused on the role and impact of school principals on school improvement efforts. There are two parts to this assignment. The first part involves an analytical review of a case study on successful principal leadership and, the second is undertaking an actual study on principal leadership of a school.

INSTRUCTIONSThe assignment consists of two questions. Question One requires a review of an article. Question Two requires students to conduct a qualitative study at a school site.

Answer both the questions.

QUESTION ONE

Read the following article:-

Hans W. Klar & Curtis A. Brewer (2014). Successful leadership in a rural, high-poverty school: the case of Country Line Middle School. Journal of Educational Administration, Vol. 52 No. 4, 2014.

Using your own words, review the article using the following format:-

(a) A summary of the article

(6 marks)

(b) The strengths and limitations of the article

(12 marks)

(c) Is this article useful to school leaders in Malaysia?

(12 marks)

[30 MARKS]

QUESTION TWO

Identify a school, preferably one that has been successfully transformed and shed its under-achieving or average-achieving image these last few years. The assignment is focused on the role played by the school principal in transforming the school. You are required to interview at least TWO senior staff members and refer to documents and records for the relevant data.

The interview protocol needs to include questions covering areas related to the role of the principal, his or her leadership qualities, personality characteristics and other pertinent factors contributing to the transformational success. You should make full use of ideas derived from the article reviewed in Question One above and fall back to your readings, internet search and experience to help you develop other related questions for the interviews.

Answer all the questions below.

(a) Discuss the background of the two senior staff.

(5 marks)

(b) Explain how you construct the interview questions.

(5 marks)

(c) Explain in detail how you conduct the actual interview.

(10 marks)

(d) Discuss in detail the views of the two senior staff.

(40 marks)

(e) What is your personal opinion about the contribution of the principal? (10 marks)

[70 MARKS]

[TOTAL: 100 MARKS]

Assignment Format:

1. Answers should be type-written on one side.

2. Use double space and 12-point Times New Roman font.

3. The assignment should consist of 3000-5000 words (15-20 pages, excluding references).

4. Please insert a word count at the top right corner of the front page.

5. References must be included and taken from reliable sources, such as journals and books. References should be the latest (year 2005 onwards).

6. The use of the American Psychological Association (APA) reference style is compulsory.

7. No marks will be awarded for plagiarism, copying, and cheating. Disciplinary action shall be taken against those found guilty.

8. Please bind the assignment well when you submit the hardcopy.

9. The cover of the assignment should include the following:

Name of university, faculty and course.

Name of student, matriculation number, programme and learning centre

Name of facilitator

Address, email, and telephone number.

10. You are to submit a hardcopy to your facilitator.

11. Online students must submit the assignment to the email address of your facilitator.

12. The last day of submission is during the 4th seminar.

13. Marks will be deducted for submission after the 4th seminar. SEPTEMBER SEMESTER 2015

HMEF5023 - EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP

MARKING SCHEME FOR ASSIGNMENT (60%)

QUESTION 1

Article Review (30 Marks)

WeakPartially meet standardsMeets standardsExceed standards

1 mark2-3 marks4-5 marks5-6 marks

Summary

a) Aim/Purpose

b) Research methodology

c) Main findingsWeak summary of the three aspects-items are inaccurate and missing.Satisfactory summary of article in the three aspects.Good summary of article.Excellent summary of the article in relation to the three aspects.

1-3 marks4-6 marks7-9marks10-12 marks

Critique

Highlight main points

4-5 Strengths

4-5 Limitations

Limited critique of the article. Highlight 1-2 strengths and limitations. No evidence from the paper. Satisfactory critique of the article. Highlight 3-4 strengths and limitations. Insufficient/inaccurate evidence from the paper.Good critique of the article. Highlight 5 strengths and limitations. Supported with evidence from the paper.Excellent critique of the article. Highlight 5 strengths and limitations. Strong evidence from the paper.

1-3 marks4-6 marks7-9marks10-12 marks

Personal response on the usefulness of the articleWeak personal response to the article. Poor/no attempt to address the issue at hand. No conclusion.Satisfactory personal response to the article. Some attempt to address the issue at hand. Weak conclusion.Good personal response to the article. Good attempt to address the issue at hand. Suitable conclusion.Excellent personal response to the article. Excellent attempt to address the issue at hand. Suitable conclusion.

TOTAL30 marks

QUESTION 2 (70 marks)

Holistic Method Using the Holistic Rubric

A weighted holistic rubric is used.

Dimension

Weak

1Partially meets standard

2Meets standards

3Exceed standards

4Weightage

Performance standards

Background of the two staff

The discussion of the staffs background is weakThe discussion of the staff background is adequateThe discussion of the staff background is good

The discussion of the staff background is excellent 4 x 1.25Minimum=0

Maximum=5

Construction of the interview protocol/

questions Explanation of the construction of the interview question is weak Explanation of the construction of the interview question is adequateExplanation of the construction of the interview question is good

Explanation of the construction of the interview question is excellent4 x 1.25Minimum=0

Maximum=5

Conduct of interviews

Limited discussion.Adequate discussion.Good discussion.Excellent

discussion.4 x 2.5Minimum=0

Maximum=

10

Views of the two senior staff in detail

(a)

Discussion of senior staff number one

The analysis is weak with no evidence to support. Limited effort to elaborate. The findings are merely presented with limited analysis. The analysis is average with some supporting evidence. Some effort made to elaborate. The findings are presented with adequate analysis. The analysis is good with evidence to support. Good effort to elaborate. The findings are presented with good analysis. The analysis is excellent strong evidence to support. Good effort to elaborate. The findings are presented with excellent analysis. 4 x 5Minimum=0

Maximum=

20

(b) Discussion of senior staff number two

The analysis is weak with no evidence to support. Limited effort to elaborate. The findings are merely presented with limited analysis. The analysis is average with some supporting evidence. Some effort made to elaborate. The findings are presented with adequate analysis

The analysis is good with evidence to support. Good effort to elaborate. The findings are presented with good analysis.

The analysis is excellent strong evidence to support. Good effort to elaborate. The findings are presented with excellent analysis.

4 x 5

Minimum=0

Maximum=

20

Personal

Opinion on the role of the principal

No attempt to provide personal opinion. Personal opinion is weak. Not supported by evidence. Average attempt to provide personal opinion. Supported by some evidence.God attempt to provide personal opinion. Supported by good evidence.Excellent attempt to provide personal opinion. Supported by clear and excellent evidence4 x 2.5Minimum=0

Maximum=

10

Total70 marks

3