Making decisions that meet the needs of all stakeholders is a complex endeavor. Effective leaders must remember to place the needs of students first, which sometimes means that compromises for other stakeholders will be required.
The goal for this assignment is to critically consider the logistics of appeasing different stakeholders and doing what is best for students. In this topic’s case study, it is important to stay focused on the curriculum and academic needs of the students. Be careful not to let the parent’s action of contacting the district office sway you from focusing attention on the curriculum aspect.
As a best practice, showing movies in class is no longer a viable option and practical form of instruction. Consider how you will interact with the classroom teacher regarding this concern. Moreover, consider how you plan to address this parent’s concern regarding changing the curriculum. Finally, if you decide to change the curriculum, are you opening up the possibility of other parents complaining about other curriculum concerns? Would the curriculum be worthy of a committee’s support?
Read the "Strengthening Curricular Programs" case study to inform the assignment.
Part 1: Case Analysis
In 250-500 words, respond to the case study by addressing the following:
- Brief summary of the case
- Issues to be resolved
- Stakeholders involved in the issues
- One or two existing laws or court rulings that relate to the issues
- District policies that relate to the issues
- Possible solutions to the issues
- Solutions chosen to resolve the issues
- Action steps (2-5) for implementing each solution, including a timeline for each step
- Potential moral and legal consequences of each solution
Part 2: Rationale
Support the case analysis with a 250-500 word rationale explaining the solutions you chose and how each solution:
- Sustains an inclusive school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning.
- Addresses difficult issues related to meeting students’ needs while promoting a culture of collaboration, trust, learning, and high expectations.
- Evaluates potential moral and legal consequences to make difficult decisions with integrity and fairness.
- Strives to build and sustain positive relationships between school representatives, students, families, and community partners, when their needs conflict.
- Uses technological tools to collect and share professional artifacts that demonstrate aspects of school leadership (ethical personal conduct, positive relationships with others, effective decision-making, stewardship of school resources, etc.).
Cite the case as well as 2-3 scholarly resources.
If possible, share your case analysis with your principal mentor and make revisions based on his or her feedback before submitting with Part 1.
While APA style format is not required for the body of this assignment, solid academic writing is expected, and any source documents should be referenced using APA documentation guidelines, which can be found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center.
Case Study: Strengthening Curricular Programs – Rubric
Case Analysis 1-3: Summary, Issues, Stakeholders 3 points
Criteria Description
Case Analysis 1-3: Summary, Issues, Stakeholders
5. Target 3 points
Analysis skillfully and convincingly summarizes the case, identifies the issues to be
resolved, and identifies the stakeholders involved in the issues.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
Analysis accurately summarizes the case, identifies the issues to be resolved, and
identifies the stakeholders involved in the issues.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
Analysis minimally summarizes the case, identifies the issues to be resolved, and
identifies the stakeholders involved in the issues.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Analysis inadequately summarizes the case, identifies the issues to be resolved, and
identifies the stakeholders involved in the issues.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Case Analysis 4-5: Laws and Policies 3 points
Criteria Description
Case Analysis 4-5: Laws and Policies
5. Target 3 points
Identifies compelling existing laws or court rulings and district policies related to
the issues.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
Collapse All
Clearly identifies existing laws or court rulings and district policies related to the
issues.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
Vaguely identifies existing laws or court rulings and district policies related to the
issues.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Ineffectively identifies existing laws or court rulings and district policies related to
Case Analysis 6-8: Solutions and Action Steps 6 points
Criteria Description
Case Analysis 6-8: Solutions and Action Steps
5. Target 6 points
Identifies exceptional solutions to resolve the issues and insightfully selects ideal
solutions for resolving the issues. Action steps and timeline are thoughtful and
realistic.
4. Acceptable 5.22 points
Identifies logical solutions to resolve the issues and appropriately selects solutions
for resolving the issues. Action steps and timeline are suitable.
3. Approaching 4.44 points
Identifies cursory solutions to resolve the issues and selects partially proficient
solutions for resolving the issues. Action steps and timeline are weak.
2. Insufficient 4.14 points
Identifies incomprehensible solutions to resolve the issues and selects poor
solutions for resolving the issues. Action steps and timeline are irrelevant.
1. No Submission 0 points
Not addressed.
Case Analysis 9: Consequences 3 points
Criteria Description
Case Analysis 9: Consequences
5. Target 3 points
Moral and legal consequences of proposed solutions are thorough and proficiently
explained.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
Moral and legal consequences of proposed solutions are properly explained.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
Moral and legal consequences of proposed solutions are missing key details.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Moral and legal consequences of proposed solutions are incorrectly explained.
1. No Submission 0 points
Rationale 9 points
Criteria Description
Rationale
5. Target 9 points
Rationale compellingly explains how the proposed solutions sustain an inclusive
school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning; address
difficult issues related to meeting students’ needs while promoting a culture of
collaboration, trust, learning, and high expectations; evaluates potential moral and
legal consequences to make difficult decisions with integrity and fairness; strive to
build and sustain positive relationships between school representatives, students,
families, and community partners, when their needs conflict; and use technological
tools to collect and share professional artifacts that demonstrate aspects of school
leadership.
4. Acceptable 7.83 points
Rationale reasonably explains how the proposed solutions sustain an inclusive
school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning; address
difficult issues related to meeting students’ needs while promoting a culture of
collaboration, trust, learning, and high expectations; evaluates potential moral and
legal consequences to make difficult decisions with integrity and fairness; strive to
build and sustain positive relationships between school representatives, students,
families, and community partners, when their needs conflict; and use technological
tools to collect and share professional artifacts that demonstrate aspects of school
leadership.
3. Approaching 6.66 points
Rationale inexplicitly explains how the proposed solutions sustain an inclusive
school culture and instructional program conducive to student learning; address
difficult issues related to meeting students’ needs while promoting a culture of
collaboration, trust, learning, and high expectations; evaluates potential moral and
legal consequences to make difficult decisions with integrity and fairness; strive to
build and sustain positive relationships between school representatives, students,
families, and community partners, when their needs conflict; and use technological
tools to collect and share professional artifacts that demonstrate aspects of school
leadership.
2. Insufficient 6.21 points
Rationale inadequately explains how the proposed solutions sustain an inclusive
Organization 1.5 points
Criteria Description
Organization
5. Target 1.5 points
The content is well-organized and logical. There is a sequential progression of ideas
that relate to each other. The content is presented as a cohesive unit and provides
the audience with a clear sense of the main idea.
4. Acceptable 1.31 points
The content is logically organized. The ideas presented relate to each other. The
content provides the audience with a clear sense of the main idea.
3. Approaching 1.11 points
The content may not be adequately organized even though it provides the audience
with a sense of the main idea.
2. Insufficient 1.04 points
An attempt is made to organize the content, but the sequence is indiscernible. The
ideas presented are compartmentalized and may not relate to each other.
1. No Submission 0 points
Documentation of Sources 1.5 points
Criteria Description
citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and
style
5. Target 1.5 points
Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment
and style, and format is free of error.
4. Acceptable 1.31 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is
mostly correct.
3. Approaching 1.11 points
Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although several
minor formatting errors are present.
2. Insufficient 1.04 points
Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to
assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors
Mechanics of Writing 3 points
Criteria Description
includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, and language use
5. Target 3 points
Submission is virtually free of mechanical errors. Word choice reflects well-
developed use of practice and content-related language. Sentence structures are
varied and engaging.
4. Acceptable 2.61 points
Submission includes some mechanical errors, but they do not hinder
comprehension. A variety of effective sentence structures are used, as well as some
practice and content-related language.
3. Approaching 2.22 points
Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in
language choice (register) and/or word choice are present.
2. Insufficient 2.07 points
Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning.
Inappropriate word choice or sentence construction are used.
1. No Submission 0 points
Total 30 points