We're Open

0% Plagiarism Guaranteed & Custom Written

1. Demonstrate a fundamental understanding of leadership approaches and mindsets.

EDLD 5311 Fundamentals Leadership – Week 3 Assignment

Course Objectives

1. Demonstrate a fundamental understanding of leadership approaches and mindsets. (CLO1)

2. Identify personal professional leadership orientation and philosophy. (CLO2)

3. Analyze and synthesize leadership competencies. (CLO3)

4. Develop an initial practicum plan. (CLO4)

5. Exemplify requisite credentials and program requirements. (CLO5)

Week 3: Essential Competencies of Leadership (1-6)

Week 3 Learning Objectives

1. Apply Essential Competencies Leadership 1 – 6 to analyze level of leadership effectiveness. (W3LO1) (CLO3)

2. Conduct a root cause analysis. (W3LO2) (CLO3)

3. Formulate a solution to the problem using the Essential Competencies 1 – 6. (W3LO3) (CLO3)

4. Record evidence of requisite credentials for candidate and mentor. (W3LO4) (CLO5)

Resources

Readings: (W3LO1, W3LO3) (CLO3)

· School Leader Internship, 3.3 “Essential Competencies of Leadership: Theory into Practice,” pp. 126-135.

· School Leader Internship, Appendix G pp. 181-184.

· Case Study 1

Lectures: (W3LO1, W3LO2, W3LO3) (CLO3)

· Lecture – Essential Competencies

1. Developing Trusting Relationships

2. Leading in the Realization of the Vision

3. Making Shared Decisions

4. Communicating Effectively

5. Resolving Conflict and Issues

6. Motivating and Developing Others

· Root Cause Analysis

Week 3 Assignment Rubric:

Use the Rubric to guide your writing.

ALL evidence must be appropriately cited in APA format.

Tasks

Level 1: Does not meet the minimum criteria

Level 2: Approaches minimum criteria

Level 3: Meets minimum criteria

Level 4: Meets target criteria

Part 1A:

15 Points

Candidate reviews ALL aspects of the problem(s) he/she and his/her peers stated in the Discussion Board and identifies themes related to each of the Essential Competencies 1-6.

(W3LO1) (CLO3)

Candidate identifies a theme for 0 to 2 of the six essential competencies, emerged from peers’ initial posts, regarding how these themes relate to aspects of the problem in the case study. (K)

0 - 8 Points

 

Candidate identifies a theme for 3 to 5 of the six essential competencies, emerged from peers’ initial posts, regarding how these themes relate to aspects of the problem in the case study. (K)

9 Points

Candidate identifies a theme for each of the six of the essential competencies, emerged from peers’ initial posts, regarding how these themes relate to aspects of the problem in the case study. (K)

12 Points

 

Candidate identifies a theme for each of the six of the essential competencies, emerged from peers’ initial posts, and provides specificity and details regarding how these themes relate to aspects of the problem in the case study. (K)

15 Points

 

Part 1B:

30 Points

Candidate identifies the primary problem and root cause. Candidate formulates a solution to the problem using the Essential Competencies 1-6.

(W3LO2, W3LO3) (CLO3)

 

Candidate vaguely identifies the problem and provides no supporting evidence. (S)

Candidate vaguely identifies the root cause and provides no supporting evidence. (S)

Candidate vaguely formulates a solution to the problem that is not related to the root cause. (S)

0 - 20 Points

 

Candidate identifies the primary problem with little supporting evidence. (S)

Candidate identifies the root cause of the problem with little supporting evidence. (S)

Candidate formulates a solution to the problem that is not clearly related to the root cause. (S)

21 Points

 

Candidate identifies the primary problem and provides supporting evidence. (S)

Candidate identifies the root cause of the problem and provides supporting evidence. (S)

Candidate formulates a viable solution to the problem that generally addresses the root cause. Supporting evidence is provided. (S)

26 Points

 

Candidate identifies the primary problem with clarity and provides thorough, specific supporting evidence. (S)

Candidate identifies the root cause of the problem with clarity and provides thorough, specific supporting evidence. (S)

Candidate formulates a viable solution to the problem that clearly addresses the root cause. Supporting evidence is provided with clarity and specificity. (S)

30 Points

 

Part 2:

25 Points

Candidate reflects on his/her capacity to apply the Essential Competencies (1-6) and root cause analysis to reach solutions.

(W3LO1, W3LO2, W3LO3) (CLO3)

Candidate demonstrates little or no self-reflection regarding level of openness of the candidate to explore others’ perspectives of the problem. Candidate provides no supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

Candidate demonstrates little or no self-reflection regarding the candidate’s capacity to identify the root cause of the problem. Candidate provides no supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

Candidate demonstrates little or superficial self-reflection regarding the candidate’s capacity to formulate a viable solution to the problem. Candidate provides no supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

0 - 16 Points

Candidate demonstrates superficial depth of self-reflection regarding level of openness of the candidate to explore others’ perspectives of the problem. Candidate provides little supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

Candidate demonstrates superficial self-reflection regarding the candidate’s capacity to identify the root cause of the problem. Candidate provides little supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

Candidate demonstrates superficial self-reflection regarding the candidate’s capacity to formulate a viable solution to the problem. Candidate provides little supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

17 Points

Candidate demonstrates an emerging depth of self-reflection regarding level of openness of the candidate to explore others’ perspectives of the problem. Candidate provides adequate supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

Candidate demonstrates an emerging depth of self-reflection regarding the candidate’s capacity to identify the root cause of the problem. Candidate provides supporting adequate evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

Candidate demonstrates an emerging depth of self-reflection regarding the candidate’s capacity to formulate a viable solution to the problem. Candidate provides adequate supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

21 Points

Candidate articulates depth of candid self-reflection regarding level of openness of the candidate to explore others’ perspectives of the problem. Candidate provides clear and specific supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

Candidate articulates depth of candid self-reflection regarding the candidate’s capacity to identify the root cause of the problem. Candidate provides clear and specific supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

Candidate articulates depth of candid self-reflection regarding the candidate’s capacity to formulate a viable solution to the problem. Candidate provides clear and specific supporting evidence from the six essential competencies. (M)

25 Points

Writing Quality:

5 Points

Grammar, Mechanics, Spelling, Citations

Narrative has glaring and unacceptable grammar, mechanics, and/or spelling errors.

And/Or, published and public sources are inadequately cited or not cited at all. (S)

0 - 2 points

Narrative has frequent grammar, mechanics, and/or spelling errors.

And/Or, most published and public sources are cited, but with many APA formatting errors. (S)

3 points

Narrative has several grammar, mechanics, and/or spelling errors.

And/Or, all published and public sources are cited with several APA formatting errors. (S)

4 points

Narrative has few or no grammar, mechanics, and/or spelling errors.

And, all published and public sources are properly cited with APA formatting. (S)

5 points

Part 1: Case Study 1 – Root Cause Analysis

(W3LO1, W3LO2) (CLO3)

Overview: Though the Root Cause model may seem to be a simple process, problems and their root causes are usually very complex. The purpose of this week’s and week 4’s assignment is to give you opportunities to practice the process and begin to learn how to apply it in real-world situations. There is no one correct answer to the problems in these case studies. As long as you provide a logical, viable solution that is supported by evidence, you will be successful in these assignments.

Directions:

Part 1A (W3LO1) (CLO3): Read this week’s initial discussion posts of at least 5 of your peers. Review ALL the aspects of the problem identified by you and your peers (according to their posts in the discussion board) for each Essential Competency. List 1 theme (the aspects listed most frequently) identified from your and your peers’ posts for each of the Essential Competencies 1 – 6 in the table below.

 

Use 12 pt. black font: Times New Roman, single spaced. The table cells will expand to fit your text.

 

1. Developing Trusting Relationships

 

2. Leading in the Realization of the Vision

 

3. Making Shared Decisions

 

4. Communicating Effectively

 

 

5. Resolving Conflict & Issues

 

6. Motivating and Developing Others

 

List 1 theme (frequently referenced comments) from the aspects of the problem, regarding behaviors from the Case Study, for each Essential Competency below. Be specific in your comments as they relate to the case study.

State a behavior (or lack of behavior) that interferes with building trust.

Provide evidence and/or an example from the case study.

State a behavior (or lack of behavior) that interferes with the realization of the vision.

Provide evidence and/or an example from the case study.

State a behavior (or lack of behavior) that interferes with shared decision making.

Provide evidence and/or an example from the case study.

State a behavior (or lack of behavior) that interferes with effective communication.

Provide evidence and/or an example from the case study.

State a behavior (or lack of behavior) that interferes with conflict/issues resolution.

Provide evidence and/or an example from the case study.

State a behavior (or lack of behavior) that interferes with motivating/developing others.

Provide evidence and/or an example from the case study.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Part 1B (W3LO2, W3LO3) (CLO3): Write two – three paragraphs (400-words minimum) explaining the following:

· Overarching primary problem

· Questions & information/data that led to discovering the root cause

· Additional information/data you would like to have to find the root cause

· The root cause for the identified problem

· The solution to the problem

· The viability of the solution for the problem

Include evidence from the case study and/or rationale to support ALL of your statements. Use the Basic Writing Elements and Root Cause Analysis models located in the course Resources.

ALL evidence must be appropriately cited in APA format.

Use 12 pt. black font: Times New Roman, single spaced. The text box will expand to fit the narrative.

Wise leaders understand the need to analyze the beliefs, dispositions, traditions, and experiences that form their personal theories of reality to guide their practice (Martin, Danzig, Wright, Flanary, & Orr, 2016). For that to occur, they must first take a deeper look at themselves to get the information they need to solve the issues. Martin et al. (2016) describes in the literature how people “tend to focus on the immediate crisis” and can find themselves in a situation where the root cause is not found and the situation continues throughout. There are 12 essential competencies that leaders use to incorporate for initiative developments. Six of those will be applied into Case Study #1 to find the root cause and use the problem as part of the solution.

Mr. Rogers, the principal at Landon High School (LHS) was confronting a troublesome stiuation at his school. He had met with an advisor from a neighborhood college, King Community College (KCC), in which he discovered that there was an overall issue the students were not prepared for college. Subsequent to getting this data numerous inquiries can happen to oneself attempting to get why. For what reason are these students leaving secondary school ill-equipped? Is it because the students are coming from homes where college isn’t encouraged due to the lack of college education in the family? Do the students not have access to rigorous materials prior to leaving high school? Are the students not ready to have the best possible assets in secondary school to permit them to learn at a more elevated level? These questions are legitimate so we can validate Case Study #1 in getting to the main cause to find where the absence of readiness is originating from.

We must first look we must look at why the students are not prepared for the college learning experience. The principal Mr. Rogers has not set clear and precise expectations for his staff so that they are able to prepare students to move on to college and be successful. He did not set any goals or visions for the staff or the students to follow. Martin et al., (2016) discussed in competency two, leading in the realization of the vision, that “leaders look for greater effectiveness with new policies, procedures, and systems”. The next question that we can look at is the staff not having a trusting relationship with Mr. Rogers and the lack of communication. Competency two and four are great ways to describe this analysis to get to the main problem. When a new principal comes along with a staff with as much tenure Early College High School, he had very little data to support the idea and the feedback was not what he was expecting. He just accepted their responses and moved along, he could have tried different ways of communicating so their voices could be heard. He could have sent out a survey for them to fill out, used suggestion boxes, or held meetings with smaller groups to engage communication with his staff members. So why does he lack trust amongst his staff? He has not self reflected on himself or the staff members so therefore there is no growth. The staff is not motivated and he does not include them to help with problems.

To start the solution process, he needs to set clear and precise expectations with his vision for the school so that it can be implemented. After he sets the expectations the staff members will be able to create a measurable goal to improve the growth of the school. The communication has to have a variety ways for the staff to use so that the trust can be built. Mr. Rogers needs to use the resources he has and learn to communicate effectively with his staff.

References

Martin, G. E., Danzig, A. B., Wright, W. F., Flanary, R. A., & Orr, M. T. (2017). School leader internship: Developing, monitoring, and evaluating your leadership experience, 4th ed. New York, NY: Routledge, pg. 126-135.


Part 2: Essential Competencies and Root Cause Analysis – Reflective Response

(W3LO1, W3LO2, W3LO3) (CLO3):

Directions: Submit a 300-word minimum reflective response. Use the Basic Writing Elements and Reflection models located in the course Resources to reflect on your capacity to apply the Essential Competencies (1-6) and root cause analysis to reach solutions. Consider the following:

· Your agreement and disagreement of your peers’ posts regarding the aspects of the problem.

· Were you open to differing perspectives from your peers?

· Did your peers’ comments influence your ability to identify the primary problem? If so, in what ways?

· How well were you able to find the root cause to the problem? Was it difficult?

· How confident do you feel about your recommended solution to the problem?

Include evidence and/or rationale to support ALL of your statements.

ALL evidence must be appropriately cited in APA format.

Use 12 pt. black font: Times New Roman, single spaced. The text box will expand to fit the narrative.

Looking back at what I read about the first six competencies, I feel that I have grown in the comprehension of every one on a more profound level. I accept that when I previously read through the conversations, I should concede I was somewhat doubtful of a portion of the reactions. I have learned through this course a pioneer must stay liberal to every circumstance that you are placed in, along these lines, I left the PC for some time and cleared my considerations, at that point sat down to assess. I saw an incredibly extraordinary comprehension to each on as I read it for greater clearness. I have seen that every single one of us has a remarkably extraordinary point of view toward genuine situations and we as a whole convey in an unexpected way. I found that the greater part of their reactions, despite the fact that worded in an unexpected way, are lined up with my perspective on the issue from Case Study #1.

The competencies that were generally lined up with myself to others were: Competency 1, Developing relationships, Competency 2, Leading in the realization of the vision, and Competency 4, Communicating effectively. Looking at this case study, I had to look deeper to find the conflict in it, after reading some of my peers responses it helped me truly identify what the problem and solution was from their point of view.

The root cause analysis really assisted me in finding the problem within the case study. To find the root cause, asking the right questions that were aligned to the competencies played a big part in helping me find the root cause of the problem. Examples being: has trust been established? Is there a clear vision of the organization? Was there an appropriate decision making model? Are needs being met among the staff? (Martin, Danzig, Wright, Flanary, & Orr, 2016). After I got all the information, finding the solution was easier for me. The why questions made me find the answers and formulate a solution.

References

Martin, G. E., Danzig, A. B., Wright, W. F., Flanary, R. A., & Orr, M. T. (2017). School leader internship: Developing, monitoring, and evaluating your leadership experience, 4th ed. New York, NY: Routledge, pg. 131.


Lamar University Summer 1 2020 2 of 3


100% Plagiarism Free & Custom Written,
Tailored to your instructions


International House, 12 Constance Street, London, United Kingdom,
E16 2DQ

UK Registered Company # 11483120


100% Pass Guarantee

STILL NOT CONVINCED?

We've produced some samples of what you can expect from our Academic Writing Service - these are created by our writers to show you the kind of high-quality work you'll receive. Take a look for yourself!

View Our Samples

corona virus stop
FLAT 25% OFF ON EVERY ORDER.Use "FLAT25" as your promo code during checkout