Syllabus

Doctor of Education in Educational Leadership (Ed.D.)

EDU 805 Managing Change – Fall A 2015

Credits - 3

Description

EDU 805 exposes students to critical competencies (attitudes, knowledge, skills) needed by leaders to create the conditions for systematic and productive change, and to facilitate the process of introducing and sustaining innovation with maximum collaboration and minimum disruption. Also considered are various perspectives on how organizations function, and how individuals and groups within those settings can interact to achieve organizational goals for planned, purposeful change.

Materials

Beaudoin, M. (2012). Institutional leadership: Transformative change or disruptive technology? In: Moore, M. (ed.) Handbook of Distance Education (3rd edition). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (Describes how educational change can be perceived either as a positive or disruptive force).

Brown, M. (2007). Building powerful community organizations. Arlington, MA: Long Haul Press. (Community organizing handbook with resources, and advice about how to work with emergent leaders).

Dyer, J., Gregerson, H., & Christenson, C. (2011) The innovator’s DNA: Mastering the five skills of disruptive innovators. New York. (reviews the characteristics of innovators in business settings, with attention to the role of creativity).

Kotter, J. (2012). Leading change. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. (An accessible discussion of how leaders can position themselves and their organizations to excel in a complex, changing environment, using his 8-step change process).

Wheatley, M (2006). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world (3rd ed.). San Francisco, CA: Berrett Koehler Publishers. (Uses organic and spiritual metaphors to make meaning of being and working within organizations)

Reflective Practice resource: www.learningandteaching.info/learning/reflect.htm

Supplemental Materials

Bolman, L., & Deal, T. (2013). Reframing organizations: Artistry, choice and leadership (5th ed). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. (earlier editions are acceptable). (a blend of theory and practice, using a four-frame approach to analyze your organization)

Christensen, C., Johnson, C. W., & Horn M. B. (2008). The disruptive classroom. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill. (How/why innovation is disruptive to the status quo in education).

Christensen, C. (1997). The innovator’s dilemma: When new technologies cause great firms to fail. Boston: Harvard Business School Press. (Why even successful leaders resist change).

Fullan, M. (2000). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. (Practical discussion about how those in leadership roles can effectively manage change processes in an era of rapid change).

Hersey, P., Blanchard, K., & Johnson, D. (2012). Management of organizational behavior. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. (Overview of various change strategies; emphasis on usefulness of Situational Leadership style).

Lewin, K. (1973). Resolving social conflicts and field theory in social science. London: Souvenir Press. (Presents the classic theory regarding the organizational change cycle- unfreezing status quo/introducing change/refreezing to institutionalize change).

Riesman, D., Glazer, N., & Denney, R. (2001). The lonely crowd: A study of the changing American character. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press. (reprint). (Classic study offers useful insights into the dynamics between individuals and society as both undergo change).

Rogers, E. & Shoemaker, F. (1971). Communication of innovations. New York, NY: The Free Press (Classic work on how innovation is communicated, implemented, and responded to, especially in traditional settings).

Sarason, S. (1971). The culture of schools and the problem of change. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley. (Why even educational entities inherently resist change for self-preservation).

Schein. E. (2010). Organizational culture and leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. (Explains importance of knowing prevailing culture before attempting to change it).

Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. London: Temple Smith. (Emphasizes value of systematic personal and professional reflection, to gain insight into how individuals change as they attempt to transform organizations).

Schon, D. (ed.). (1991). The reflective turn: Case studies in and on educational practice. New York, NY: Teachers College Columbia. (Useful case studies based in educational contexts).

Learning Objectives and Outcomes

The course is designed to guide change agents in critically evaluating the functioning of their organization, developing a change proposal, and planning its implementation. The Change Proposal (CP) requires application of organizational theory, transformative leadership, and program evaluation processes.

Student Learning Outcomes

  1. Analyze the structure and culture of an organization to define the scope of a change initiative and use research and data to support your analysis;
  2. Articulate and communicate the vision guiding the change initiative and its potential to assess inequity and create greater access to programs and resources
  3. Analyze how organizations, groups, and individuals respond to the disruptive nature of change and demonstrate approaches to creating conditions that support innovation
  4. Identify and align leadership and organizational change theories to inform the actions recommended in the change proposal
  5. Document strategies to foster a climate of collaboration to achieve change goals and sustain innovation
  6. Use multiple frames of analyses along with practice, research and data, to critically reflect on transformative leadership development
  7. Critically assess and provide peer review feedback and coaching to improve and refine leadership development and research skills
  8. Prepare and present a theoretically sound and strategically viable change proposal

 

Assignments

Major Course Activities:

  • Complete a Critical Problem Inventory. The CPI can be based on the EDU 801 Site Study or can be related to a new situation.
  • Complete a Critical Problem Inventory – Group Case Study.
  • Craft a Situational Leadership critique.
  • Reflect on leadership.
  • Actively participate in interactive discussion boards, providing original postings and responses to classmates’ posts.
  • Prepare and present a theoretically sound change proposal. The proposal should be approximately 3,000 words, cite and reference 8-10 relevant sources to support your work, and adhere to APA style throughout.

Grading Policy

Your grade in this course will be determined by the following criteria:

Grade Breakdown

AssignmentPercentage of Grade
Critical Problem Inventory - 801 site study or new one10
Critical Problem Inventory - Group Case Study10
Situational Leadership Critique10
Reflection on Leadership10
Interactive Postings10
Change Proposal50

The criteria for all courses in the Ed. D. program are described in the modules and/or rubrics. Assignments will include guidelines with rubrics, descriptions of expectations, or examples, and include point values. Coursework will be assessed and graded using individual evaluation protocols that are provided for the three major assignments. Final “grades” will reflect the following schema:

  • High Pass (HP): Work that exceeds all or most of the criteria of the respective assignment. To receive a high pass the work must demonstrate exceptional command and display of all or most required elements;
  • Pass (P): Work that meets all requirements and expectations as specified in assignments, and is fully satisfactory in every respect;
  • Low Pass (LP): Work is deemed unsatisfactory.

Note** The instructor will determine if an assignment may be revised and resubmitted for rescoring. Candidates may proceed to subsequent courses in the curriculum with one LP grade, and although there is no failing grade, a second LP course grade results in termination from the doctoral program.

All assignments are to be completed in a timely manner with appropriate accuracy, detail, thought and reflection fitting of doctoral-level degree candidates. All assignments (done in writing or with other media applications) are graded on the basis of faculty assessment of your ability to accurately apply concepts from readings, organization, and mechanics. See the appendices for grading rubrics. Please note that you must save all submitted documents in Microsoft Word in order for them to transmit successfully. All work must be properly identified and include author(s)’ name(s). Submit all written work in APA style (Refer to the APA Publication Manual for guidance; Purdue OWL is an excellent, user-friendly resource).

Schedule

 

Week Activities and Assignments

 

Due dates

1

Pre-week Welcome activity:

Leadership quote reflection

 

9-02

1

Read:

Kotter, Part One

Wheatley Introduction

 

9-06

1

Watch videos:

In Module Overview and Intro: Getting Started

In Assignments & Assessments: John Kotter’s 8 Steps: The importance of urgency

Meg Wheatley’s: 8 Fearless Questions

 

9-06

1

Download and review CPI prompts

 

9-06

1

Review the 5 case study abstracts and sign up for a case (4-5 students per case)

 

9-06

       

2

Read: Dyer, Part One & Part Two;

Wheatley Ch 1 – 4

Bolman & Deal, web-based link RE: frameworks (optional)

 

9-13

2

Watch video: Critical Problem Inventory

 

9-13

2

Set up session(s) with Study Group to discuss case.

 

TBD

2

Use CPI for diagnosis of own site study

Submit CPI of your own site

 

9-13

3

Read: Wheatley 5-7

 

9-20

3

Watch video: Situational Leadership Overview

 

9-20

3

Identify three articles or web-based resources on Situational Leadership.

Post critique of Situational Leadership

 

9-20

9-20

3

Finalize case analysis/repot with Study Group (Use CPI for case analysis)

 

9-22

3

Post Case Study analysis to Study Group Discussion Board

 

9-22

4

Read: Wheatley 8 and 9

 

9-27

4

4

Complete and submit a formal leadership reflection. Note: This essay should be informed by 3 resources about reflective practice (selected from course links), and also 3 sources/citations from literature on facilitating organizational change.

Submit an individual reflection on your group collaboration experience

 

9-27

9-27

9-27

4

Register for: Webinar – Post questions about Change Proposal

 

9-27

5

Consultation on Change Proposal Webinar

 

 

10-7 7:30 PM

5

Watch video: Crafting your change proposal

 

10-4

5

Read: Kotter, Part 2

Brown: Section I: The Inside Story

 

10-4

 

 

   

5

Draft PART ONE of your Change Proposal and submit for formative feedback

 

10-5

6

Read: Kotter, PART 3

Read excerpt from Beaudoin, M. (2012). Institutional Leadership: Transformative Change or Disruptive Technology.

Read Brown, Section II & III

 

10-11

6

Continue work on PART TWO draft of your Change Proposal.

 

10-11

6

Post completed Change Proposal draft sections

1 & 2 in your Study Group file exchange. Request feedback from 1-2 Study Group members.

 

10-11

7

Read: Brown: Section IV

 

10-18

7

7

Submit full final draft (inc. PART 3) of your change proposal. Submit when ready for final non-graded feedback.

Share with SGDB peers if wanting feedback

 

 

10-18

10-18

7

Take draft document to your worksite team and stakeholders and ask for feedback (Optional)

 

10-17

Friday

8

Submit Final Draft

 

10-23

(Friday)

8

Discussion Board: Revisit quotes posting

Complete course evaluation (as soon as available).

 

9-24

Student Resources

Accommodations

Any student who would like to request, or ask any questions regarding, academic adjustments or accommodations must contact the Student Access Center at (207) 221-4438 or pcstudentaccess@une.edu. Student Access Center staff will evaluate the student's documentation and determine eligibility of accommodation(s) through the Student Access Center registration procedure.

Policies

Turnitin Originality Check and Plagiarism Detection Tool

The College of Professional Studies uses Turnitin to help deter plagiarism and to foster the proper attribution of sources. Turnitin provides comparative reports for submitted assignments that reflect similarities in other written works. This can include, but is not limited to, previously submitted assignments, internet articles, research journals, and academic databases.

Make sure to cite your sources appropriately as well as use your own words in synthesizing information from published literature. Webinars and workshops, included early in your coursework, will help guide best practices in APA citation and academic writing.

You can learn more about Turnitin in the Turnitin Student quick start guide.

Technology Requirements

Please review the technical requirements for UNE Online Graduate Programs

Course Evaluation Policy

Course surveys are one of the most important tools the University of New England uses for evaluating the quality of your education, and for providing meaningful feedback to instructors on their teaching. In order to assure that the feedback is both comprehensive and precise, we need to receive it from each student for each course. Evaluation access is distributed via UNE email at the beginning of the last week of the course.

Information Technology Services (ITS)

ITS Contact: Toll Free Help Desk 24 hours/7 days per week at 1-877-518-4673

Attendance Policy

Online students are required to submit a graded assignment/discussion prior to Sunday evening at 11:59 pm ET of the first week of the term. If a student does not submit a posting to the graded assignment/discussion prior to Sunday evening at 11:59 pm ET, the student will be automatically dropped from the course for non-participation. Review the full attendance policy.

Late Policy

Assignments: Late assignments will be accepted up to 3 days late; however, there is a 10% grade reduction (from the total points) for the late submission. After three days the assignment will not be accepted.

Discussion posts: If the initial post is submitted late, but still within the discussion board week, there will be a 10% grade reduction from the total discussion grade (e.g., a 3 point discussion will be reduced by 0.3 points). Any posts submitted after the end of the Discussion Board week will not be graded.

Please make every effort ahead of time to contact your instructor and your student support specialist if you are not able to meet an assignment deadline. Arrangements for extenuating circumstances may be considered by faculty.

Student Handbook Online - Policies and Procedures

The policies contained within this document apply to all students in the College of Graduate and Professional Studies. It is each student's responsibility to know the contents of this handbook.

UNE Online Student Handbook

UNE Course Withdrawal

Please contact your student support specialist if you are considering dropping or withdrawing from a course. The last day to drop for 100% tuition refund is the 2nd day of the course. Financial Aid charges may still apply. Students using Financial Aid should contact the Financial Aid Office prior to withdrawing from a course.

Academic Integrity

The University of New England values academic integrity in all aspects of the educational experience. Academic dishonesty in any form undermines this standard and devalues the original contributions of others. It is the responsibility of all members of the University community to actively uphold the integrity of the academy; failure to act, for any reason, is not acceptable. For information about plagiarism and academic misconduct, please visit UNE Plagiarism Policies.

Academic dishonesty includes, but is not limited to the following:

  1. Cheating, copying, or the offering or receiving of unauthorized assistance or information.
  2. Fabrication or falsification of data, results, or sources for papers or reports.
  3. Action which destroys or alters the work of another student.
  4. Multiple submissions of the same paper or report for assignments in more than one course without permission of each instructor.
  5. Plagiarism, the appropriation of records, research, materials, ideas, or the language of other persons or writers and the submission of them as one's own.

Charges of academic dishonesty will be reviewed by the Program Director. Penalties for students found responsible for violations may depend upon the seriousness and circumstances of the violation, the degree of premeditation involved, and/or the student’s previous record of violations.  Appeal of a decision may be made to the Dean whose decision will be final.  Student appeals will take place through the grievance process outlined in the student handbook.