ASSIGNMENT

___________________________________________________________________________
HPEM7023
EDUCATIONAL CHANGE AND INNOVATION
SEPTEMBER 2020 SEMESTER

SPECIFIC INSTRUCTION

1. Answer in English or Bahasa Malaysia.

2. Number of words: 3000 – 5000 words excluding references for EACH question (Question 1
and Question 2).

3. Submit your assignment ONCE only in a SINGLE file.

4. Submit your assignment ONLINE.

5. Submission date : 7 DECEMBER 2020

6. This assignment accounts for 100% of the total marks for the course.

1
 ASSIGNMENT QUESTION

QUESTION 1 (30%)

Write a critical essay (critique) on the following article:

Title: Students’ Ideas on Innovations in Higher Education
Authors: Inese Jurgena and Dagnija Cedera
Available at: https://doaj.org/article/e205a8fd8e9f47188dcfb1fcbd71adbd 

Jurgena Inese, & Cēdere Dagnija. (2016). Students’ Ideas on Innovations in Higher
Education. Signum Temporis: Journal of Research in Pedagogy and Psychology, (1), 30.

Your essay should contain the important ideas discussed in the paper and a critical analysis.
You are expected to include the following:
a. Summary of the article
b. Strengths and limitations of the study
c. Implications of this study for quality of educational innovations
d. Utility or relevance of the ideas presented in this study to your own context or
background

You are to offer an actively engaged response to the writers’ ideas, supported by thoughtful
reasoning and proof. You are strongly encouraged to engage with ideas, theories and other
research in this field, thus providing a review of relevant literature to support your
arguments.

Refer to the guidelines rubric below on the expected assignment content and also the basis
for which marks are to be awarded for the report.

[Total : 30 marks]

2
QUESTION 2 (70%)

PURPOSE:
The purpose of this assignment is to enable the learners to identify and evaluate change and
innovation initiatives within an educational setting. It will also enable the learners to apply
the knowledge learnt on evaluating the effectiveness and sustainability of the chosen
initiative.

REQUIREMENT:
Conduct a case study in an educational institution (school/college/university) about a
change or innovation initiative involving teaching and learning using new technologies.
Conduct interviews with the school leadership, staff and pupils about the effectiveness of
the chosen initiative.

The interviews should be varied (individual and focus group) to seek the views pertaining to
the implementation of the initiative and its utility and effectiveness.

Transcribe the interviews and this should provide the findings of the study. Reference to
the transcripts should also be made where necessary in the paper.

The study should focus on the following aspects:

1. The change initiative and its importance in the institution and wider context.
2. The implementation and effectiveness of the initiative.
3. The critical factors for the sustainability of the initiative.
4. The ethical considerations used in the initiative.

You are expected to present a critical discussion on the planning, implementation and
effectiveness of the change initiative, with reference to pertaining theories or models.
Sustainability of the initiative should also be investigated. Ethical considerations used
throughout this initiative should be discussed.

3
Refer to the guidelines (scoring rubric) below on the expected assignment content and also
the basis for which marks are to be awarded for the report.

(TOTAL: 70 MARKS)

4

HPEM7023 EDUCATIONAL CHANGE AND INNOVATION / SEPTEMBER 2020
QUESTION 1 (30%)
*QN CLO
Criteria Weight
Introduction
Summary of the article
which includes
aim/purpose, research
methodology and main
findings.
Discussion on the
strengths and limitations
of the study
Implications of this study
for educational
innovations.
Discussion supported
with relevant literature.
Discussion on the utility/
relevance of the ideas in
own context/background
ATTACHMENT
ASSIGNMENT RUBRICS
Unsatisfactory
Excellent Good Fair Poor Or
Max
No response
Marks
4 3 2 1 0
1.5 The introduction The introduction previews The introduction does not There is an introduction There is no 6
previews the article and the article and presents adequately preview the which does not clearly introduction at all
presents clearly the the summary of the three article and the summary preview the article and and no summary
summary of the three aspects. Most of the parts of the three aspects lacks no summary offered on presented.
aspects. Each aspect is are analysed critically. analysis. the three aspects.
analysed critically. It is
interesting to read.
2.0 Excellent critique of the Good critique of the Satisfactory critique of Limited critique of the There is no 8
article. Highlights 5 article. Highlights 5 the article. Highlights 3-4 article. Highlights 1-2 discussion on the
strengths and strengths and limitations. strengths and limitations. strengths and strengths and
limitations. Strong Supported with evidence Insufficient/inaccurate limitations. No evidence limitations of the
evidence from the from the paper. evidence from the paper. from the paper. study.
paper.
1.5 A detailed and critical A detailed and critical A brief discussion on the The discussion No discussion on the 6
discussion on the discussion on the implications of this study presented is poorly implication is
implications of this study implications of this study for educational focused on the presented.
for educational for educational innovations, without a implications of this
innovations, supported innovations, supported by good reference of study for educational
by good review of review of literature. The literature. The discussion innovations.
literature. The discussion is deemed lacks depth.
discussion is deemed sound.
above expectation.
0.75 Describes in detail the Describes in detail the Brief description on the Brief mention of some There is no 3
utility and relevance of utility and relevance of utility and relevance of of the ideas and their discussion on the
each idea in the learner’s each idea in the learner’s each idea in the learner’s relevance in the relevance of the
own context/ own context/ background. own context/ learner’s own context/ ideas in learner’s
5
 background. The ideas The ideas are clearly background. Only some background. own background.
are very clearly discussed. ideas are discussed and
discussed. discussion lacks depth.

Conclusion 0.75 The conclusion is strong. The conclusion is strong. It The conclusion ties up all The conclusion is The conclusion is 3
It ties up all the aspects ties up all the aspects the aspects above. recognisable, but does missing.
above. Well thought and above. not tie up clearly all the
summarised. aspects.

Organisation 1.0 Details are placed in a Details are placed in a Details are not in logical Many details are not in No detailed 4
logical order and logical order and order and distract the logical order. There is provided.
presented effectively. presented effectively. The reader. little sense that the
The paper is interesting paper is deemed to meet writing is organised.
and clearly exceeds the standards of a doctoral
expected standards in level.
this doctoral work.

Total 7.5 30
*QN = Question Number

6
QUESTION 2 (70%)
Unsatisfactory
Excellent Good Fair Poor Or
Max
*QN CLO No response
Criteria Weight Marks
4 3 2 1 0
Introduction 1.5 The introduction The introduction previews The introduction does not There is an introduction There is no introduction 6
previews the the structure and adequately preview the to the paper but it does at all.
structure and objectives of the paper structure of the paper but not preview the
objectives of the clearly. clearly states its structure and objectives
paper clearly. objectives. of the paper. It describes
Important concepts some other issues.
are clearly explained.
It is interesting to
read.
Data Collection 2.0 Describes in detail Describes in sufficient Brief description on the Brief mention of data There is no description 8
Method the process and details the process and process of identifying collection but without on how data is
rationale on rationale on respondent’s respondent and the adequate focus on collected. No transcript
respondent’s selection and the interview conduct of interview. One respondent selection provided.
selection and the conducted. A variety of type of interview and the interview. Only
interview conducted. interviews conducted. conducted. Complete/ one type of interview
A variety of Complete interview partial transcript conducted. Transcript
interviews transcript included. included. incomplete.
conducted well.
Complete interview
transcript included.
Discussion on the 3.0 A detailed discussion A detailed discussion on A brief discussion on the The discussion No discussion on the 12
planning and on the planning and the planning and planning and presented is poorly issue is presented.
implementation of implementation of implementation of the implementation of the focused on the planning
the change the change initiative. change initiative. The change initiative. The and implementation of
initiative The discussion is discussion is sound, with discussion lacks depth the change initiative and
deemed above reference to theories. and not much reference there is poor reference
expectation with is made to theories. to theories.
reference to
theories.

7
 Discussion on the 3.0 A detailed discussion A detailed discussion on A brief discussion on the A discussion is No discussion provided. 12
effectiveness of the on the effectiveness the effectiveness of the effectiveness of the presented but is found
change initiative. of the change change initiative is change initiative is to be less than
initiative is presented. The discussion presented. satisfactory.
presented. The is sound.
discussion is deemed
above expectation.
3.0 A detailed and A detailed and critical A brief discussion on the A discussion is No discussion is 12
Discussion on the
critical discussion on discussion on the factors factors for the presented but is found presented.
critical factors for the
the factors for the for the sustainability of the sustainability of the to be less than
sustainability of the
sustainability of the initiative. The critical initiative. The critical satisfactory.
initiative.
initiative. The critical factors are identified and factors are identified but
factors are relevant discussed. not discussed in detail.
and very well
discussed.
Ethical considerations 1.5 The paper presents The paper presents some The paper presents The paper presents The ethical 6
very clearly discussion on ethical ethical considerations ethical considerations consideration is
discussed ethical considerations. with very brief and little with no discussion. missing.
considerations discussion.
Conclusion 2.0 The conclusion is The conclusion is strong. It The conclusion ties up the The conclusion is The conclusion is 8
strong. It ties up the ties up the THREE aspects THREE aspects above. recognisable, but does missing.
THREE aspects above. not tie up clearly the
above. Well thought three aspects.
and summarised.
Organisation 1.5 Details are placed in Details are placed in a Details are not in logical Many details are not in No detailed provided. 6
a logical order and logical order and order and distract the logical order. There is
presented presented effectively. The reader. little sense that the
effectively. The paper is deemed to meet writing is organised.
paper is interesting standards of a doctoral
and clearly exceeds level.
the expected
standards in this
doctoral work.
Total 17.5 70
*QN = Question Number