1

University of Calgary Faculty of Education - Office of Graduate Programs in Education EDER 619.98 L13 - Entrepreneurial Leadership for Change and Innovation Winter 2013 Instructor: Sarah Elaine Eaton, Ph.D. Phone: (403) 244-9015 Email: seaton@ucalgary.ca Winter Term Lecture Dates: January 8 – April 16, 2013 No Classes: Reading Week - no classes Sunday, February 17 - Sunday, February 24, 2013 Family Day- Monday, February 18, 2013 Good Friday - Friday, March 29, 2013 Elluminate Sessions: TBD Welcome to Entrepreneurial Leadership for Change and Innovation. This outline expresses my vision for our work together. Calendar Description: This course explores boundary breaking entrepreneurial leadership, looking for innovative alternatives to traditional education and preventative strategies for more effective support for at risk students and their communities. Context: Leadership, management and administration of educational, health, non-profit and for-profit enterprises is undergoing an exciting and transformational shift in the second decade of the 21st century. The needs of organizations, regardless of whether they are public, private or not-for-profit are complex and there is no single leadership model that effectively fits them all. Perhaps more so in education than in any other field, great tensions exist between the social imperative to serve students and the need to manage ever-more limited financial resources in an ethically responsible, yet sustainable manner. Leaders need to build capacity both in the people they lead, as well as the organizations that employ them. In this course, we will examine some of the shifts in perceptions and practice, as well as cutting-edge trends in leadership, as well as practical implications for those who work in public, private, non-profit and other types of organizations. Major topics: • • • • • • In this course we will examine leadership across a variety of different types of organizations including: Traditional Non-profit Non-profits with income generating-activities Social enterprise Socially responsible business Corporations practicing social responsibility Traditional for-profit business Office: online Office Hours: by appointment Skype: Sarah Elaine Eaton

2

Together we will explore the benefits and pitfalls of each type of organization, as well as the models of leadership that exists among them. We will relate these models to education in the Canadian context, questioning where we have come from, where we are now and where we might be heading. Assumptions: In this course, we take this non-traditional approach to leadership in part, because we assume that students have already been exposed to dialogue, reading and training on the topic of leadership through their own professional journey and previous studies. This course aims to dig deeper, probe more thoughtfully and challenge preexisiting notions. The primary assumption made in this course is that there is no single “right” model of leadership. Students are encouraged to question all models in an intellectually curious and respectful manner, understanding that each model has strengths and weaknesses and that none of them provides “the answer”. Learner Outcomes: Relate social and financial considerations to models of leadership. Critically examine issues relating to entrepreneurial leadership using current research literature to understand different models, values and approaches to leadership in diverse organizations. 3. Articulate the relationship between social values, moral imperatives and fiscal pressures in various models of leadership.
1. 2.

Course Design and Delivery This is an online course. Students are expected to participate in the asynchronous learning tasks using the Blackboard learning environment and synchronous whole-class Elluminate sessions. We recognize the importance of working in collaboration with others and learning with others in a scholarly community of inquiry and have designed learning tasks accordingly. As part of learning task #1, ongoing contribution to the discussion forum is required regularly throughout each week of the course. Peers will depend on your participation and shared commitment to foster a collaborative knowledge-building environment. Learning task #2 will provide students with an opportunity to co-create and facilitate in a virtual team context. Finally, learning task #3 allows individuals to reflect on the course through a final written work. The instructor’s role is to facilitate the course work and to support students as they engage in the learning tasks; to provide students with ongoing, timely and constructive feedback to further their learning and growth in entrepreneurial leadership. Required Readings: Reimers-Hild, C., & King, J. W. (2009). Six Questions for Entrepreneurial Leadership and Innovation in Distance Education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(4). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ojdla/winter124/reimers-hild124.html In addition to the article noted above, each week, groups will seek and present readings to the class to accompany the assigned topic. Readings are to be easily accessible in an online or open-source format and free of charge, so that all students, regardless of where they may reside, may easily access the reading. Please consult with your instructor prior to posting your group’s reading to the entire class. Students are required to read the article(s) selected by their peers.

3

Recommended Reading: Publication Manual of the American Psychological Association. (2010). (Sixth ed.). Washington, D.C: American Psychological Association. Since students are expected to use APA style and formatting for citations, discussion board postings and the final paper, you are strongly encouraged to buy your own copy of the APA manual (6th ed.), as this is the standard used in our discipline. Considerations when reading: When you read material for the course, you may want to think about the following questions: Author Who is this person? Professor? Activist? From where and what discipline? With what background or experience? Who publishes/reads/teaches this person’s work? Audience For whom was this article written? Academics? Teachers? People who already agree? Skeptics? Argument What is the main point in 20 words? Evidence Is this an empirical piece? A theoretical piece? What support does the author summon for her/his points? What’s Left Out? Are there perspectives, approaches, questions left out of this article that are important for understanding the topic? Most Compelling Quote Is there one line that really got to you, either positively or negatively? Implications for Policy Now what? So what? Implications for Practice Implications for You Connections to the Other Readings? Does this inform your understanding of other authors/articles? Library Resources: You must be able to access books and journal articles using the University of Calgary Library system. You will find the Article Indexes on the U. of C. Library website to be helpful. The Article Indexes to access databases such as Academic Search Premier, Education Full Text, and ERIC will provide you with additional academic resources. Since this is a graduate course, you are encouraged to use academic refereed documents.

4

Learning Tasks Overview: LEARNING TASK NUMBER Learning Task #1 PERCENT DESCRIPTION
OF

LEARNING TASK

OF FINAL GRADE

GROUPING FOR TASK Individual

Participation in and Contribution to Online Scholarly Community Presentation and Facilitation of One of the Major Course Topics. Final paper

35%

Learning Task #

35%

Group

Learning Task #3

30%

Individual

Weekly Course Schedule: A detailed, suggested daily schedule of Course Topics. This schedule may change to meet the emerging needs and dynamics of the participants in the course. Date Jan. 7 to 13 Topic Course Introduction Class content Discussion Forum: Provide self-introduction in the Blackboard Discussion forum. In your introduction, you may wish to share information about what you do professionally, your scholarly interests, your challenges and experiences with leadership. You may also add a photo or yourself. Reading / Assignments Due Self-introduction due by Friday, January 11 by 11:59 p.m. Mountain time.

Jan. 14 to 20

Expectations of Entrepreneurial Leadership and the Spectrum of Organizations

Question Bank: What does entrepreneurial leadership mean to you? What assumptions about leadership do you bring to this course? What were your “ah ha!” moments from the article? What are your questions, reflections and thoughts around the spectrum of organizations?

Reimers-Hild, C., & King, J. W. (2009). Six Questions for Entrepreneurial Leadership and Innovation in Distance Education. Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration, 12(4). Retrieved from http://www.westga.edu/~distance/ ojdla/winter124/reimershild124.html

5

Jan. 21 to 27 and Jan. 28 to Feb. 3

Major course topic: Leadership and management of traditional nonprofit organizations

Group #1 - Pecha Kucha-style presentation and facilitation of the discussion board.

Send your proposed readings to your instructor by Fri. Jan. 18 for approval. Post your presentation by Monday at 09:00

Feb. 4 to 10 Major course topic: and Feb. 11 to Leadership and 16 management of non-profit organizations with income-generating activities

Group #2 - Pecha Kucha-style presentation and facilitation of the discussion board.

Send your proposed readings to your instructor by Fri. Feb. 1 for approval. Post your presentation by Monday at 09:00. Note: This week concludes on Saturday, February 16. All postings must be in by 11:59 p.m. on Saturday night.

Feb. 17 to 24 Feb. 25 to March 3 and March 4 to 10

Reading Week - No classes Sunday, February 17 - Sunday, February 24, 2013 Major course topic: Social enterprise Group #3 - Pecha Kucha-style presentation and facilitation of the discussion board for the week. Send your proposed readings to your instructor by Fri. Feb. 22 for approval. Post your presentation by Monday at 09:00. Major course topic: Socially responsible business Group #4 - Pecha Kucha-style presentation and facilitation of the discussion board for the week. Send your proposed readings to your instructor by Fri. March 9 for approval. Post your presentation by Monday at 09:00.

March 11 to 17 and March 18 to 24

March 25 Major course topic: to 31 and Corporate social April 1 to 7 responsibility

Group #5 - Pecha Kucha-style presentation and facilitation of the discussion board for the week.

Send your proposed readings to your instructor by Fri. March 22 for approval. Post your presentation by Monday at 09:00. Note: No classes on Good Friday - Friday, March 29, 2013 Final paper outline due by Sunday, March 31, 2012 by 11:59 p.m. Mountain Time

6

April 8 to 14 and April 15 to 16

Major course topic: Traditional forprofit business

Group #6 - Pecha Kucha-style presentation and facilitation of the discussion board for the week.

Send your proposed readings to your instructor by April 5 for approval. Post your presentation by Monday at 09:00. Final paper due by Tuesday, April 16, 2013 by 11:59 p.m. Mountain Time

Changes to Schedule: Please note that changes to the schedule may occur in response to student questions and conversations. Learning Tasks and Assessment There are three (3) required Learning Tasks for this course. Post any questions to the instructor using the Q&A forum or via email.
1. Learning Task 1: Participation in and Contribution to Online Scholarly Community (35%)

Due: ongoing, January 8 to April 16, 2012 Active participation in the course discussion board, a minimum of once per week throughout the course. You are expected to contribute a minimum of two to three paragraphs per week to the class discussion on the assigned weekly readings and course topics. This learning task involves not only posting your own original contributions, but also providing feedback to peers. Reflect on the assigned readings and presentations. Discuss these in some depth with your classmates. Consolidate ideas, formulate questions, and demonstrate deep reflection, etc. Students are expected to demonstrate professional deportment in an online learning environment and to use the discussion board as a virtual space to develop an online community of scholarship as graduate students. Scholarly writing is expected and all writing in the discussion forum should be in APA style. When appropriate, APA citations are to be used. Due date: This is an ongoing component of the course. You are expected to contribute regularly and on a weekly basis. Your instructor encourages you to contribute by the Wednesday of each week in order to provide more opportunity for ongoing discussion. At the latest, your contributions for the week must be posted by Sunday evening 11:59 p.m. Mountain Time each week of the course. Overall tasks required:
· ·

Reflections on assigned readings and presentation each week. Friday, January 11 by 11:59 p.m. Mountain time.

7

Criteria For Assessment of Learning Task 1 Criteria “Surface” Discourse: Does not meet requirements (Bto B) Readings are summarized with little or no critical analysis or thoughtful interpretation. Meets Requirements for Scholarly Discourse (B+ to A-) Deeper Scholarly Discourse: Meets All and Exceeds Some Requirements (A to A+) You draw upon content from the readings and experiences, along with additional information sources, as data for one’s own knowledge building and ideas-improving processes. You treat all participants as legitimate contributors to the shared goals of the community; all have a sense of ownership of knowledge advances achieved by the group. You mobilize personal strengths to set forth your ideas and to negotiate a fit between personal ideas and ideas of others, using contrasts to spark and sustain knowledge advancement rather than depending on others to chart that course for you. You play an active role in putting forward different ideas to create a dynamic environment in which contrasts, competition, and complementarity of ideas is evident, creating a rich environment for ideas to evolve into new and more refined forms. You treat all ideas as improvable by aiming to mirror the work of great thinkers in gathering and weighing evidence, and ensuring that explanations cohere with all available evidence.

Constructive Uses of Authoritative Sources

You critically evaluate information sources and recognize that even the best are fallible.

Democratizi ng Knowledge

You add your contribution with little recognition of others in the group.

You recognize and praise everyone’s work and help others find needed information.

Epistemic Agency

You demonstrate a personal sense of direction, power, motivation, and responsibility.

You mobilize personal strengths to set forth your ideas and to negotiate a fit between personal ideas and ideas of others.

Idea Diversity

You participate in brainstorming different ideas.

You play an active role in putting forward different ideas to create a dynamic environment.

Improvable Ideas

You accept or reject ideas as truth on the basis of logical argument and evidence.

You treat all ideas as factual, informed by argument and evidence, and improvable.

8

Knowledge Building Discourse

Your contribution to discourse allows participants to express and gain feedback on their ideas, defend different points of view, arrive at conclusions. Non-scholarly writing is presented

Your contribution to discourse serves to identify shared problems and gaps in understanding.

Your contribution to discourse serves to identify shared problems and gaps in understanding and to advance understanding beyond the level of the most knowledgeable individual. Clear scholarly writing in APA writing style.

Scholarly Writing

Scholarly writing – mostly using APA writing style with some editing considerations to achieve clarity. You consistently cite sources using APA standards with very few errors.

APA citations

You tend not to cite sources using APA standards.

You consistently cite sources using APA standards, paying particular attention to details, resulting in errorfree citations. You contribute a minimum of twice per week.

Frequency of contributions

Your contributions average less than once per week.

You contribute a minimum of once per week.

9 2.

Learning Task 2: Presentation and Facilitation of One of the Weekly Course Topics (35%) This group assignment is comprised of three discrete, yet inter-related components: Presentation Group discussion facilitation Confidential peer evaluation Due dates: Part 1: Presentation due: Monday morning at 9:00 a.m. Mountain time. Part 2: Group discussion facilitation: Ongoing throughout the time assigned to your group, starting at Monday morning at 9:00 a.m. Mountain time and concluding Sunday evening at 11:59 p.m. (unless otherwise stated) Part 3: Peer evaluation is e-mailed to your instructor by Tuesday at 11:59 p.m. of the week following your facilitation. This is a group project. You are responsible for a major topic of the course. Your main goal is to ensure that your classmates understand the key points of the topic so that they can apply this new knowledge to their own scholarly writing. This assignment is comprised of three discrete, yet inter-related components: Part 1: Develop a Pecha Kucha-style presentation (20 images x 20 seconds) designed to highlight the key points of the your topic. Your presentation should include narration (20 seconds per slide). Though you may use any technology you wish to develop your presentation (e.g. PowerPoint, Keynote, etc.) ultimately, your presentation should be presented to the class in a format that is accessible to all students (e.g. ideally Vimeo or YouTube). Please note that Blackboard has limited disk usage capabilities and may not handle large multimedia files very well. If you have the ability to post a link to a video site, this helps to avoid exceeding the allowed space for our course. Your presentation is a group endeavour, but the final result should be one cohesive, seamless presentation, rather than “chunks” of individual presentations poorly linked together. Your objective is to work together as a team to produce a final product that this polished, scholarly and ultimately aids in other students’ understanding of they key concepts of the chapter you are responsible for. Resources to aid in the design and development of your presentation: http://www.pechakucha.org/ http://www.wired.com/techbiz/media/magazine/15-09/st_pechakucha http://avoision.com/pechakucha Part 2: Facilitate the class discussion for the week. This includes responding to student comments and feedback, providing supportive feedback in a professional manner as a peer presenter, adding additional resources as appropriate. At least one member of your group will facilitate at least once per day during the time assigned to your group. All group members must actively participate in the facilitation of the class discussion. The group is responsible for selecting two (2) readings on the course topic. At least one reading is to be from a peer-reviewed scholarly journal. The second reading does not necessarily have to be from a peer reviewed journal, but must be a seminal work on the topic. You are strongly encourage to consult with your instructor about the selection of the readings for the class. Your group is responsible for developing thought-provoking discussion questions that are directly related to the readings you have chosen and facilitating a class discussion based on those specific readings.

1. 2. 3.

10

One reading, along with your Pecha-Kucha-style presentation will be the focus for the first week. The other reading will be the focus for the second week that your group is responsible for facilitating. Part 3: Peer evaluation. Even though this is a group assignment, grades will be assigned on an individual basis. The final component of this assignment is to provide to your instructor an assessment of your group peers, using the feedback form provided by your instructor. This evaluation will be used to assist with the assignment of grades to individual group members. E-mail your instructor the peer evaluation form after you have completed it. Do not send it to your group members or post it on Blackboard. This is your confidential assessment of your peers. Criteria For Assessment of Learning Task 2 Criteria Does not meet requirements (B- to B) Your presentation was posted after the deadline of Monday morning at 09:00 Mountain time. Your presentation did not follow the Pecha Kucha format or exceeded the 6:40 time limit. Your presentation had no discernible introduction, body or conclusion; or your presentation was poorly organized. Ineffective presentation of key ideas. Meets Requirements (B+ to A-) Your presentation was posted by the deadline of Monday morning at 09:00 Mountain time. Your presentation followed the Pecha Kucha format. Meets all and exceeds some requirements (A to A+) Your presentation was posted prior to the deadline of Monday morning at 09:00 Mountain time. Your presentation followed the Pecha Kucha format in a captivating and compelling manner. Your presentation had a clear introduction, body and conclusion, with each section transitioning seamlessly into the other. Effective presentation of key ideas of your topic. You explicitly define and highlight the central points of your chapter in a compelling and memorable manner. Your classmates will remember the main ideas because of your stellar presentation of key ideas. Your presentation was coherent and flowed seamlessly from one slide to the next. The final result was a presentation that was captivating and engaging. Presenters fully embrace the challenge of offering a compelling and persuasive presentation in a very short time period.

Presentatio n deadline

PechaKucha format Presentatio n organizatio n Key ideas

Your presentation had a clear introduction, body and conclusion.

Effective presentation of key ideas of your topic. You explicitly define and highlight the central points of your chapter.

Presentatio n coherence and flow

Your presentation appeared disjoined or appeared to be a patchwork of individual presentations, rather than one coherent presentation.

Your presentation was coherent and flowed seamlessly from one slide to the next.

11

Group facilitation article selection submission

You did not submit your proposed readings to your instructor for approval by the deadline or you required an extension.

You submitted your proposed You submitted your proposed readings to your instructor readings to your instructor for approval by the deadline. for approval prior to the deadline. You selected two appropriate readings, at least one of which was from a peerreviewed scholarly journal. You selected two appropriate, interesting and compelling readings, at least one of which was from a peer-reviewed scholarly journal. Group members actively facilitate the class discussion more at least twice per day during the week you are facilitating. You provide clear and helpful support to your peers in a manner that engages further thoughtful discussion, adding additional resources to the discussion. Your enthusiastic facilitation continually co-constructs knowledge with your classmates throughout the week. Your confidential peer evaluation was submitted via e-mail to your prior to the deadline of the Tuesday morning at 09:00 Mountain time, of the week following your group facilitation. You assign each group member a “peer review letter grade”. You add commentary that justifies the grade you have assigned, providing clear, helpful and fair assessment. Clear scholarly writing in APA writing style.

Group You did not select any peer facilitation - reviewed articles or you presented only one article for article discussion. selection

Group facilitation frequency

Group members do not actively facilitate the class discussion on a daily basis during the week you are facilitating. No or minimal interaction with the class. One-word responses or replies that do little to further the discussion.

Group members actively facilitate the class discussion on a daily basis during the week you are facilitating. You provide clear and helpful support to your peers in a manner that engages further thoughtful discussion.

Group facilitation

Peer evaluation deadline

You missed deadline or required an extension to complete the work.

Your confidential peer evaluation was submitted via e-mail to your by the deadline of the Tuesday morning at 09:00 Mountain time, of the week following your group facilitation. You assign each group member a “peer review letter grade”. You add commentary that justifies the grade you have assigned.

Peer evaluation substance

There was a lack of peer review or the peer review was not constructive.

Scholarly Writing

Non-scholarly writing is presented

Scholarly writing – mostly using APA writing style with some editing considerations to achieve clarity.

12

APA citations

You tend not to cite sources using APA standards.

You consistently cite sources using APA standards with very few errors.

You consistently cite sources using APA standards, paying particular attention to details, resulting in error-free citations.

3.

Learning Task 3: Major Writing Assignment – Final Paper (30%) Using the content you have learned in this course as a foundation, develop an original final paper. You may write on any scholarly subject that interests you, but the topic must clearly address a problem of practice or a research question related to our course topics. As this assignment includes reviewing current literature in your field and demonstrating a firm grasp on the topic, as well as related theory and practice. This final learning task is as much process-oriented, as it is product-oriented. You are to demonstrate that you have thoughtfully engaged in the writing process from concept through to final production. You are strongly encouraged to consult with your instructor throughout the process of developing your final paper. This learning task is comprised of two discrete, yet inter-related components: 1. Concise final paper outline. 2. Final paper. Due dates: Part 1: Part 2: Two-page outline due by Sunday, March 31, 2012 by 11:59 p.m. Mountain Time Final paper due by Tuesday, April 16, 2013 by 11:59 p.m. Mountain Time

Details of your learning task Part 1: Two-page outline Provide a concise 1.5 to 2-page outline (exclusive of references) that clearly outlines your introduction, body (main points and supporting points), preliminary recommendations and conclusion. Include at least 5 references formatted according to APA style. Part 2: Final paper You are encouraged to consider the major course topics as a starting point for your paper. You may also write on an organizational case study or another topic related to entrepreneurial leadership. Elements of your final paper include, but are not limited to: Length Style Format Ten (10) pages maximum, exclusive of title page, abstract, references and appendices. APA Style throughout. Consult your APA Publication Manual (6th Ed.) for guidance on writing style. APA formatting throughout including but not limited to: title page, running head, headers page numbers, double-spaced, 1-inch margins, 12 pt. serif font such as Times New Roman.

Resource to help you:

13

http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/560/01/ You are encouraged to dialogue with your instructor throughout the writing process. Post any questions to the instructor using the Q&A forum or via email.

Criteria For Assessment of Learning Task 3 Criteria Does not meet requirements (B- to B) You do not submit your outline by the deadline or require an extension. Your outline is less than 1.5 pages or exceeds the 2-page limit (exclusive of references). Your outline does not follow the general formatting preferences of APA. Meets Requirements (B+ to A-) You submit your outline by the deadline. Your outline is between 1.5 and 2 pages. Meets all and exceeds some requirements (A to A+) You submit your outline prior to the deadline. Your outline maximizes the allowable length of 1.5 to 2 pages. Your outline demonstrates exemplary use of the general formatting preferences of APA: 1-inch margins, 12-point serif font, but uses single spacing. You include at least 5 scholarly references accurately cited using APA format

Outline submission Outline length

Outline APA formatting

Your outline follows the general formatting preferences of APA: 1inch margins, 12-point serif font, but uses single spacing. You include at least 5 scholarly references formatted with few APA errors.

Outline References

Your outline contains fewer than 5 scholarly references. Your references are not formatted using APA or contain many APA errors. You do not submit your final paper by the deadline; or require an extension; or you submit multiple versions or corrected revisions of your final paper.

Final paper -Submission

You submit your final paper by the deadline via e-mail to your instructor with no cover letter in the body of your message.

You submit one final “clean” copy of your final paper by the deadline to your instructor via e-mail with an appropriate cover letter in the body of your e-mail. Presents exemplary scholarly writing that requires little to no editing and demonstrates adherence to APA standards.

Final paper - Non-scholarly writing is presented or your writing Writing does not adhere to APA style.

Presents scholarly writing.

14

Final paper - Your writing is colloquial or employs a language Language register that is too casual register or intimate for a scholarly paper.

You employ a consultative language register that is mostly free of colloquialisms.

You employ a consultative or formal register that strikes a balance between scholarly discourse and plain language, without using language that is of such a high register that it obfuscates your intended meaning. Your paper is free of spelling, grammar and structural errors. You have employed consistent spelling throughout your paper, according to the preferences of the journal you have chosen and APA standards. Your final paper is shorter than is 9 to 10 pages in length, exclusive of title page, references and appendices. You maximize the allowable submission length to create a pithy, concise and compelling research paper. Your title is direct, clear powerful invitation describing article, suggesting argument or implications; includes searchable keywords in title. You provide a minimum of 5 to 10 precise keywords in your abstract. Your provide a clear, wellorganized, pithy and compelling abstract for your paper. Your paper starts with a gripping first sentence. The introduction clearly establishes the value of your paper. The introduction serves as a “road map” to the reader; articulates originality, the topic’s novelty, appeal, timely interest, what’s new about the work and draws upon relevant literature.

Final paper - Your paper contains many spelling, grammar or Spelling, structural errors. grammar and structure

Your paper contains very few spelling, grammar or structural errors.

Final paper - Your final paper is shorter than 9 pages or exceeds length the 10 page limit, exclusive of title page, abstract, references and appendices.

Your final paper is shorter than is 9 to 10 pages in length, exclusive of title page, references and appendices.

Final paper - The title of your final paper is vague or nontitle descriptive.

A clear title to your final paper is provided.

Final paper - You do not provide keywords in your abstract Abstract keywords Final paper - Your abstract is missing, poorly written or Abstract disorganized. content Final paper - No discernible Introduction introduction, or the introduction is poorly written.

You provide a minimum of 3 precise keywords in your abstract. You provide a clear, wellorganized abstract for your paper. The paper starts with a clear introduction that clearly identifies the point of your paper.

15

Final paper Organizatio n& structure

Your writing is not clearly organized. No clear structure is discernible. Main ideas are difficult to identify.

Your article is clearly organized. Ideas are clearly expressed.

Your work provides a compelling opening (anecdotal, subject, critical, significance, historical or argumentative) and conclusion that summarizes in a powerful way pointing beyond the article. Your article is clearly organized with explicit APA headings and subheadings for structure.

Final paper - No clear context for the research is provided. Context

Your research is clearly situated within the current and historical research or professional context, relating it to previous work conducted in the field.

Clearly describes the context for the problem of practice (i.e. may be related to previously completed literature review, your own classroom problem, an innovation you would like to design or try out, an actionresearch project, capstone project idea, etc.). Your research is clearly situated within the current and historical research or professional context, relating it to previous work conducted in the field. Your work adds an original and fresh perspective to the ongoing conversation and debate on your chosen topic.

Final paper - No clear argument is evident, or the argument Argument is weak. Argument is illogical.

Your work develops and delivers a coherent, clear and logical argument, supported by pertinent examples and data.

Your work develops and delivers a coherent, clear and logical argument, supported by pertinent examples and data. Expresses a coherent point of view intended to influence and persuade; directed to a broad academic audience. Your work demonstrates a sophisticated development of your argument following scholarly writing techniques.

16

Final paper - Your paper presents no Significance clear rationale or does not clearly demonstrate the significance of your work.

Clearly describes the rationale for the work, linking it to other relevant and current works in the field.

Clearly describes the rationale for the work, explicitly situating your research in the current context of research in your field. You articulate the difference this work is intended to make for other professionals or scholars and demonstrates why readers should care about it. Summarizes argument and restates the article’s relevance to literature. The conclusion points beyond the article to the larger context, highlighting its significance and provides direction for future research. Contains a complete list of references, accurately cited using APA format.

Final paper - A clearly articulated Conclusions conclusion is not provided or the conclusion is poorly constructed.

The conclusion clearly and succinctly summarizes the argument.

Final paper - Your paper contains fewer than 8 scholarly Reference references or your references are incomplete or missing. You pay little attention to APA standards.

Contains cited references with few APA errors.

17

Grading Scale
Grade A+ A AB+ B GP Value 4.0 4.0 3.7 3.3 3.0 Distribution of Grades Graduate Description Outstanding Excellent - superior performance showing comprehensive understanding of the subject matter Very good performance Good performance Satisfactory performance Note: The grade point value (3.0) associated with this grade is the minimum acceptable average that a graduate student must maintain throughout the program as computed at the end of each year of the program. Minimum pass for students in the Faculty of Graduate Studies

BC+ C CD+ D F

2.7 2.3 2.0 1.7 1.3 1.0 0.0

All grades below B- are indicative of failure at the graduate level and cannot be counted toward Faculty of Graduate Studies course requirements.

*Based upon Faculty of Graduate Studies 2009/2010 Calendar, “Distribution of Grades” All material used in the course is for the sole use of the individual and should not be recopied in either print or digital format. For copyright guidelines, including those relating to photocopying and electronic copies, please refer to the Association of Universities and Colleges of Canada (AUCC) fair dealing guidelines: https://library.ucalgary.ca/sites/library.ucalgary.ca/files/Fair_dealing_policy_final_revised_March_2011-2.pdf Academic Accommodation: Students with a disability, who require academic accommodation, need to register with the Disability Resource Centre http://www.ucalgary.ca/UofC/Others/DRC MC 295, telephone 2208237. Academic accommodation letters need to be provided to course instructors no later than fourteen (14) days after the first day of class. It is a student's responsibility to register with the Disability Resource Centre and to request academic accommodation, if required. Campus Security provides a range of services intended to promote and facilitate a safe and secure learning and living environment, e.g. the SafeWalk program for students attending classes on campus. For more information please visit http://www.ucalgary.ca/security/ or telephone (403) 220-5333. The Freedom of Information Protection of Privacy Act prevents instructors from placing assignments or examinations in a public place for pickup and prevents students from access to exams or assignments other than their own. Therefore, students and instructors may use one of the following options: return/collect assignments during class time or during instructors' office hours, students provide instructors with a selfaddressed stamped envelope, or submit assignments, or submit/return assignments as electronic files attached to private e-mail message. ---------------------------Students are advised to become familiar with the Faculty of Graduate Studies policies and the University of Calgary support services in these areas: intellectual property, academic integrity, plagiarism, research ethics, effective writing, and English language proficiency. Information about these topics is available through the following web addresses: · http://www.grad.ucalgary.ca/Policies%20and%20Procedures.aspx · http://www.ucalgary.ca/honesty/

18 · http://www.ucalgary.ca/research/compliance/ethics/ Thinkers, Writers and Scholars

The following individuals are well known for their work in leadership. You are encouraged to consult works by these people throughout the course and in particular, for your final paper. Experts in education Michael Apple Stephen Ball James Banks Michael Barber Nick Burbules W.L. Boyd David Cohen Larry Cuban Linda Darling-Hammond Amanda Datnow Lorna Earl Joyce Epstein Michael Fullan Jane Gaskell Henry Giroux Thomas Greenfield Alma Harris Erik Hanushek Andy Hargreaves David Hargreaves Mark Holmes John Holt David Hopkins Alfie Kohn Jonathan Kozol Ken Leithwood Henry Levin Karen Louis Allan Luke Ron Manzer Peter McLaren Milbrey McLaughlin Bill Mulford Jeannie Oakes Diane Ravitch Lauren Resnick Viviane Robinson Seymour Sarason Karen Seashore Louis Louise Stoll Geoff Whitty Doug Willms Experts from other disciplines Chris Argyris (and Don Schon) - psychology Robin Barrow - philosophy Warren Bennis - business Basil Bernstein – sociology, linguistics Pierre Bourdieu - soc James Coleman - soc Jim Collins - business David Cooperrider John Dewey - phil Peter Drucker – organization theory Emile Durkheim - soc Michel Foucault - soc Anthony Giddens - soc Erving Goffman - soc Jurgen Habermas - phil Charles Handy – org theory Sandra Harding - phil Ron Heifetz - leadership Daniel Khanemann and Aaron Tversky - psych John Kretzmann - community development Thomas Kuhn - phil Charles Lindblom - mgmt James March - org theory Karl Marx - economics John McKnight - community development Douglas McGregor – org theory Alasdair McIntyre - phil John McMurray - phil Linda McQuaig - politics Harry Mintzberg - mgmt Talcott Parsons - soc Stephen Pinker - psych Karl Popper - phil B F Skinner - psych Keith Stanovich - psych Frederick Taylor - soc Lev Vygotsky - psych Max Weber – soc Aaron Wildavsky

19

Some Important works Anyon, J. (1997). Ghetto schooling. New York: Teachers College Press. Apple, M. (1996). Cultural politics and education. New York: Teachers’ College Press. Bennis, W. G., & Townsend, R. (1995). Reinventing Leadership: Strategies to Empower the Organization. N.Y.: Harper Collins. Berger, P. & Luckmann, T. (1967). The social construction of reality. New York: Anchor. Berliner, D. (2002). Educational research: The hardest science of all. Educational Researcher 31(8), 18-20. Bernstein, R. (1976). The restructuring of social and political theory. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press. Bottery, M. (1998). Professionals and policy: Management strategy in a competitive world. London: Cassell. Bowles S. and Gintis. H. (1976). Schooling in Capitalist America: Educational Reform and the Contradictions of Economic Life. London: Routledge. Bryk, A.S., Sebring, P.B., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., & Easton, J. Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Burns, J. M. (1978). Leadership. New York: Harper & Row. Callahan, R. (1962). Education and the cult of efficiency: A study of the social forces that have shaped the administration of the public schools. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Chubb, J. E., & Moe, T. M. (1990). Politics, markets, and America's schools. Washington, D.C.: The Brookings Institution. Cohen, March, J. & Olsen (1972). A garbage can model of organizational choice. Administrative Science Quarterly, 17 (1) 1-25. Coleman P. & Collinge, J. (1998). Parent, student and teacher collaboration. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin. Collins, J. (2001). Good to Great: Why Some Companies Make the Leap... and Others Don't. New York: Harper Collins. Collins, J. (2005). Good to Great and the Social Sectors: Why Business Thinking is Not the Answer: A Monograph to Accompany Good to Great. Boulder, Colorado. Connell, R. W. (1982). Making the difference. Sydney, AU: George Allen & Unwin. Cooperrider, D. L. (2007). Business as an agent of world benefit: Awe is what moves us forward. Retrieved from http://appreciativeinquiry.case.edu/practice/executiveDetail.cfm?coid=10419 Cooperrider, D. L., & Whitney, D. (2008). A positive revolution in change: Appreciative inquiry. Retrieved from http://appreciativeinquiry.case.edu/uploads/whatisai.pdf

20

Cooperrider, D. L., Whitney, D., & Stavros, J. M. (2003). Appreciative inquiry handbook. Bedford Heights, OH: Lakeshore Publishers. Csíkszentmihályi, M. (1990). Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row. Cushman, K. (2010). Fires in the Mind: What Kids Can Tell Us about Motivation and Mastery. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Dalton, M. (1959). Men who manage. New York: Wiley. Dror, Y. (1986). Policy-making under adversity. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction. Edelman, M. (1988). Constructing the political spectacle. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Elmore, R. (2004). School reform from the inside out: Policy, practice, and performance. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press. Fullan, M. (2007). The New Meaning of Educational Change. 3rd edition. New York: Teachers College. Giddens, A. (1994). Beyond left and right. Cambridge, UK: Polity Press. Gidney, R. (1999). From Hope to Harris: The reshaping of Ontario’s schools. University of Toronto Press. Greenfield, T and Ribbins, P. (eds.) (1993) Greenfield on Educational Administration. London: Routledge. Grubb, N. (2009). The money myth. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. Gutmann, A. (1987). Democratic education. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press. Hargreaves, A. & Fullan, M. (eds.) (2009). Change wars. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. Routledge: United Kingdom, pp. 1-375. Heath, J. (2001). The efficient society: Why Canada is as good as it gets. Toronto: Viking. Heifetz, R. A. (1994). Leadership without easy answers. Cambridge, MA: The Belknap Press of Harvard UP. Hirschman, A. (1970). Exit, voice, and loyalty. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Holt, J. (1964). How children fail. New York: Pitman. And Holt, J. (1967). How children learn. New York: Pitman. Hughes, J., Martin, P. & Sharrock, W. (1995). Understanding classical sociology: Marx, Weber, Durkheim. London: Sage.

21

Jencks, C., Smith, M., Acland, H., Bane, M., Cohen, D., Gintis, H., Heyns, B. & Michaelson, S. (1971). Inequality: A reassessment of the effect of family and schooling in America. New York: Basic Books. Khaneman, D., Slovik, P. and Tversky, A (1982). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. New York: Cambridge University Press. Kingdon, J. (1994). Agendas, alternatives and public policies, 2nd edition. New York: HarperCollins. Kretzmann, J. P., & McKnight, J. L. (1993). Building Communities from the Inside Out: A Path Toward Finding and Mobilizing a Community's Assets. Skokie, IL: ACTA Publications. Kretzmann, J. P. (1995). Building communities from the inside out. Shelterforce Online, (September/October). Retrieved from http://www.nhi.org/online/issues/83/buildcomm.html Kretzmann, J. P., McKnight, J. L., Dobrowolski, S., & Puntenney, D. (2005). Discovering Community Power: A Guide to Mobilizing Local Assets and Your Organization's Capacity. from the Asset-Based Community Development Institute, School of Education and Social Policy, Northwestern University: http://www.abcdinstitute.org/docs/kelloggabcd.pdf Lindblom, C. & Cohen, D. (1979). Usable knowledge. New Haven: Yale University Press. Lindblom, C. (1990). Inquiry and Change. New Haven: Yale University Press. Lortie, D. (1976). Schoolteacher. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Manzer, R. (1994). Public schools and political ideas. Toronto: University of Toronto Press. McLaughlin M (1990). The Rand Change Agent Study revisited: macro perspectives, micro realities. Educational Researcher, 19(9) 11-16 McLaughlin, M. (1987). Learning from experience: Lessons from policy implementation. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 9(2), 171-178. Meyer, J. W., & Rowan, B. (1977). Institutionalized organizations: Formal structures as myth and ceremony. American Journal of Sociology, 83, 340–363. Morgan, G. (1986). Images of organization. Newbury Park, CA: Sage. Nutley, S., Walter, I., & Davies, H. (2007). Using evidence: How research can inform public services. Bristol: Policy Press Oakes, J. (2005). Keeping track: How Schools Structure Inequality (2nd ed.). New Haven & London: Yale University Press. Pfeffer, J. and Sutton, R. (2006) Hard facts, dangerous half-truths and total nonsense: Profiting from evidence-based management, Boston, MA: Harvard Business School Press Plank, D. & Boyd, W. L. (1994). Antipolitics, education, and institutional choice: The flight from democracy. American Educational Research Journal, 31(2), 263-281. Rogers, E. (1995). Diffusion of innovations. 3rd edition. New York: Free Press.

22

Stanovich, K. (2005). The Robot’s Rebellion. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Stone, D. (1988). Policy paradox and political reason. New York: HarperCollins. Tavris, C., & Aronson, E. (2008). Mistakes were made… but not by me. Boston: Houghton Mifflin. Thaler,R. & Sunstein, C. (2008). Nudge: Improving decisions about health, wealth, and happiness. New Haven: Yale University Press. Tinder, Glenn. Political Thinking. 5th ed. New York: HarperCollins, 1991. 6th edition 2004. Thrupp, M. (1999). Schools making a difference: Let’s be realistic! Buckingham: Open University Press. Timperley, H., Wilson, A., Barrar, H. & Fung, I. (2007). Teacher Professional Learning and Development, Best Evidence Synthesis (BES) Iteration, Ministry of Education, Wellington New Zealand. Wilkinson, R. & Pickett, K. (2008). The spirit level. London: Penguin. Weick, K. (1976). Educational organizations as loosely coupled systems. Administrative Science Quarterly, 21(1). 1-19. Willis, P. (1977). Learning to Labour: How Working Class Kids Get Working Class Jobs. Westmead: Saxton House. DiMaggio P. & Powell, W. (1983). The iron cage revisited: Institutional isomorphism and collective rationality in organizational fields. American Sociological Review, 48(2), pp. 147-160. Ungerleider, C. (2003). Failing our kids: How we are ruining our public schools. Toronto: McClelland and Stewart. Wildavsky, A. (1979). Speaking truth to power. Boston: Little Brown. OECD – the PISA reports – 2007, 2010 Some Important Journals in Educational Administration Canadian Journal of Educational Administration and Policy (online) Educational Administration Quarterly Educational Leadership, Management and Administration Educational Policy Education Policy Analysis Archives (online) International Journal of Education Leadership Journal of Educational Administration Journal of Educational Administration and Foundations Journal of Educational Change Journal of Education Policy Leadership and Policy in Schools School Leadership and Management Important general journals in education Alberta Journal of Educational Research Canadian Journal of Education Educational Researcher

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful