Solved by verified expert:Need help revising this paper for below 10% TurnitIn…paper attached!As an educational leader, it is incumbent upon the leader to assess local resources, the socio-political environment, economic resources, and statutory requirements that affect development of collaborative relationships. This assignment, in two parts, will have the learner work with an assessment tool that can be applied as a planning or diagnostic tool. Part 1 will look at the first five phases of Rubin’s Life Cycle model.General Requirements:Use the following information to ensure successful completion of the assignment:• Grading rubric to grade the assignments (attached)• Using APA style for their writing assignments. • This assignment requires that at least two additional scholarly research sources related to this topic, and at least one in-text citation from each source be included (attached)Directions:Write a 1,000–1,250-word paper discussing the application of the Collaborative Planning and Diagnostic Instrument offered in the Rubin textbook. Include the following in your paper:1. Determine whether the tool will be used as a planning or diagnostic tool.2. Explain your reasoning.3. Apply the Collaborative Planning and Diagnostic Instrument to a system you are familiar with and create responses to the questions in the tool. (Include this as an appendix to your paper. This is not included in your total word count.)4. Analyze your responses and report how the tool will be applied through phases 1-5.5. Discuss the theoretical foundations for your responses.6. Use the questions as a guide, but do not create a paper of questions and answers. Instead, apply a narrative approach.
assessment_tools_for_planning_or_diagnosis.docx
rubric.docx
Unformatted Attachment Preview
Running head: ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
Assessment Tools for Diagnosis
Grand Canyon University: EDL-817
October 18, 2017
1
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
2
Assessment Tools for Diagnosis
Research validates the significant role a collaborative educational leader plays in building
a professional learning community (PLC) (Ansell & Gash, 2008; Buffum, Erkens, Hinman, Huff,
Jessie, Martin, & Williams, 2008; Montiel-Overall, 2005; Rubin, 2009). The collaborative leader
must empower others, share leadership, invite creativity, and cultivate innovative thinking
(Buffum et al., 2008; Montiel-Overall, 2005). To accomplish cooperation the collaborative
leader needs a model to help keep the collaborative process in motion. The best model to use is
the Rubin’s (2009) Collaborative Planning and Diagnostic Instrument. The purpose of this paper
is to use Rubin’s (2009) instrument on an existing system, apply and analyze the responses to the
assessment, and finally support the analysis with theoretical foundations.
Diagnostic Tool
The system that the author is newly joining is an ongoing collaboration so Rubin’s (2009)
instrument will be used as a diagnostic tool. The system is the United Stated Air Force Academy
(USAFA) Preparatory School’s program of Basic Military Training (BMT) which is a summer
program that all USAFA Preparatory School cadets must attend. It is an indoctrination into
military and cadet life that lasts about two weeks. The tool will be used to detect context
changes, prospective problems, identify strengths, and predict the next steps in the collaboration
cycle for the planning and execution of BMT (Ansell & Gash, 2008; Rubin, 2009). Now we will
apply Rubin’s (2009) instrument to this collaborative effort.
Application and Analysis of Collaborative Planning and Diagnostic Instrument
Phase 1: Why Collaborate?
Phase one answers the question of why the USAFA Preparatory School collaborates for a
successful BMT. The USAFA Preparatory School wants to be sure that each new attendee
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
3
understands the military and the expectations that will be levied on them as being a military
member. A collaborative approach, across all departments of the school, will achieve this goal
since BMT cannot be executed without manpower, agencies from around USAFA, and strong
collaborative leadership (Morrill, 2013; Rubin, 2009), which all entails problem setting, direction
setting, and implementation (Ansell & Gash, 2008). This phase is off to a great start since BMT
is scheduled for July 2017 and planning meetings have begun. At this point the institutional
worrier has not been identified that is the person that pays strict attention to the details of this
collaboration (Ansell & Gas, 2008; Rubin, 2009).
Phase 2: Outcomes? Decision Makers?
Phases two through five are all about developing the collaboration’s human resources and
knowledge base. Phase two identifies the decision makers and the specific desired outcomes for
BMT; some which are not identified. The main desired outcome of BMT is for a new cadet to
embrace the Air Force core values of Integrity First, Excellence in All They Do, Service Before
Self and to live honorably.
The key players that have been identified are the BMT Commander and the BMT
Superintendent and they are working to identify the other key players by name. Some decision
makers identified are military trainers, the security clearance team, the medical team, and the
administrative support team. Some of the identified objectives are favorable security clearances
for each member, safety and adequate medical care for all cadets, and thorough paperwork
processing for each cadet. Once all key players are identified they will need to be a part of the
planning meetings for BMT (Rubin, 2009). Missing members of the BMT team are the athletic
and academic departments. Both departments should be a part of this collaboration since the
outcomes of BMT will significantly effect each department throughout the remainder of the
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
4
school year. Something that is strange is that many of the people attending the planning meetings
will not be around in July.
Phase 3: Research: Knowledge, Policy, Politics
Research for this year’s BMT has not happened. Each year BMT is thrown together with
little continuity from the past. Clearly the history behind BMT have not been thoroughly taken
into consideration. Not all the stakeholders have been invited to the planning meetings for BMT.
If BMT is not executed, then cadets will not be living honorable and the rest of the school year
for all departments of the USAFA Preparatory School will not be successful.
Phase 4: Stakeholders?
Some stakeholders have been identified by name, but others have not. There was no
strategy to recruit any of the prospective partners or stakeholders. Without some of the key
players it is hard for BMT to take shape, but we are early in the process so with a little coaching
maybe the BMT Commander and Superintendent would be open to feedback. A look into the
past as well as suggestions for others that need to be recruited for this collaboration is warranted
(Ansell & Gash, 2008; Rubin, 2009).
Phase 5: Frame and Recruit
Also, participation by all stakeholders is a must and hopefully the BMT commander will
be open to that suggestion as well. Recruitment during the early phases of collaboration has not
been evident (Ansell & Gash, 2008; Rubin). There should be a discussion with each partner to
confirm the connection of individual interests to the overall mission of BMT. Not sure all
departments at the USAFA Preparatory School understand how they fit into the BMT mission.
That should be discussed across departments (Ansell & Gash, 2008; Rubin, 2009). Now that we
have analyzed the process what are the theoretical foundations of these responses.
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
5
Theoretical Foundations
The theories behind the above responses come from expectation-states, social capital,
social constructivist, and social cultural theories (Berger, Rosenholtz, & Zelditch, 1980; MontielOverall, 2005). Expectation-states theory entails how future performance arise out of task related
interactions (Berger et al., 1980). The “expected state” of a cadet completing BMT a new cadet
to embrace the Air Force core values of Integrity First, Excellence in All They Do, Service
Before Self and to live honorably. But what if these “expected-states” are taught differently? The
social constructivist believes that a learner is an active participant in the learning process through
social interactions and through quality educational experiences while a realist believes student
learn best with teacher-directed instruction (Montiel- Overall, 2005). These are competing
theories on the BMT planning team. But, these two types of views can work together to produce
a cadet that is ready for military life.
Social capital is how the BMT planning committee interacts and builds relationships. The
relationship between the BMT Commander and the BMT Superintendent must be one of
complete trust. The BMT Superintendent stands in for the BMT Commander if for some reason
the commander is not able to be around so these two must be in sync to execute BMT. Therefore,
the planning meetings should have trust building exercises and all stakeholders should be a part
of these exercises (Berger et al., 1980). This BMT planning committee should not disband once
BMT is over it should be an ongoing collaboration since many of these people must work the
rest of the school year together.
Conclusion
Research validates the significant role a collaborative educational leader plays in building
a PLC (Ansell & Gash, 2008; Buffum et al., Montiel-Overall, 2005; Rubin, 2009). The purpose
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
of this paper was to use Rubin’s (2009) instrument on an existing system, apply and analyze the
responses to the assessment, and finally support the analysis with theoretical foundations. To
institute collaboration, the collaborative leader needs a model to help keep the collaborative
process moving forward.
6
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
7
References
Albertyn, R., & Frick, L. (2016). A collaborative higher education initiative for leadership
development: Lessons for knowledge sharing. South African Journal of Higher
Education, 30(5), 11-27. doi:10.20853/30-5-617
Ansell, C., & Gash, A. (2008). Collaborative governance in theory and practice. Journal of
public administration research and theory, 18(4), 543-571. doi:10.1093/jopart/mum032
Berger, J., Rosenholtz, S. J., & Zelditch, M., Jr. (1980). Status organizing processes. Annual
Review of Sociology, 6, 479-508. Retrieved from
https://oaktrust.library.tamu.edu/bitstream/handle/1969.1/154809/%2377%20Status%20
Organizing%20Processes.pdf?sequence=1&isAllowed=y
Buffum, A., Erkens, C., Hinman, C., Huff, S., Jessie, L. G., Martin, T. L., & Williams, K. C.
(2008) The collaborative administrator. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree. Retrieved from
http://www.gcumedia.com/digital-resources/solution-tree/2008/the-collaborativeadministrator_ebook_1e.php
Hamilton-Jones, B., & Vail, C. O. (2014). Preparing special educators for collaboration in the
classroom: Pre-service teachers’ beliefs and perspectives. International Journal of Special
Education, 29(1), 76-86. Retrieved from
https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&
db=eric&AN=EJ1034079&site=eds-live&scope=site
Montiel-Overall, P. (2005). A theoretical understanding of teacher and librarian collaboration
(TLC). School Libraries Worldwide, 11(2), 24-48. Retrieved from
https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&
db=edo&AN=18753532&site=eds-live&scope=site
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
8
Morrill, R. (2013). Collaborative strategic leadership and planning in an era of structural change:
Highlighting the role of the governing board. Peer Review, 15(1), 12-16. Retrieved from
https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&
db=a9h&AN=87741565&site=eds-live&scope=site
Raelin, J. (2006). Does action learning promote collaborative leadership? Academy of
Management Learning & Education, 5(2), 152-168. doi:10.5465/AMLE.2006.21253780
Rubin, H. (2009). Collaborative leadership: Developing effective partnerships for communities
and schools (2nd ed.). Retrieved from http://www.gcumedia.com/digitalresources/sage/2009/collaborative-leadership_ebook_2e.php
Rubin, L., & Hebert, C. (1998). Model for active learning: Collaborative peer teaching. College
Teaching, 46(1), 26-30. Retrieved from
https://lopes.idm.oclc.org/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&
db=edsjsr&AN=edsjsr.27558871&site=eds-live&scope=site
Thornton, K., & Cherrington, S. (2014). Leadership in professional learning
communities. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 39(3), 94-102. Retrieved from
https://search.informit.com.au/documentSummary;dn=666865224965585;res=IELHSS
Ward, S. L., LaFramboise, L. M., & Cosimano, A. J. (2016). Original article: Collaborative
student leadership conference. Journal of Professional Nursing, 32(-), S67.
doi:10.1016/j.profnurs.2016.01.013
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
9
Appendix A
Rubin’s (2009) Collaborative Planning and Diagnostic Instrument (p. 47-53)
Phase 1: Why Collaborate?
The teaching profession, in particular mathematics teachers, has a distinguished record of service
to the United States. The core principle of this code is Service. Service in the teaching profession
means sacrificial service to students, parents, colleagues, school management, and society.
Phase 2: Outcomes? Decision Makers?
de of Ethics, Overview; MTNA, Code of Ethics)
Phase 3: Research: Knowledge, Policy, Politics
Respect is believing in the worth and dignity of each human being. Respect also encompasses
creating a learning atmosphere that fosters the potential of everyone. Protect the freedom to
learn, to instruct, and to guarantee an equal educational opportunity for everyone. Demonstrate
respect for diversity, social justice, freedom and democracy.
Phase 4: Stakeholders?
Care is seeking to develop sound connections with students, fellow teachers, parents, school
administration, and the community. These connections are to be characterized by professional
judgement and trust. Care is also about maintaining and preserving ethical conduct among
students, colleagues and school management. Care encompasses dealing with breaches of
integrity with discretion and courage. Deal with each student, colleague and school administrator
considerately and justly.
Phase 5: Frame and Recruit
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Phase 6: Leaders, Structure, Roles, and Rules
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Phase 7: Develop and Action Plan
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
10
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Phase 8: Begin With Successes
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Phase 9: Build Bonds Between Partners
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Phase 10: Celebrate Successes
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Phase 11: Assess, Adjust, and Reinforce Bonds
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Phase 12: Goal-Centered Accountability
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Phase 13: Scaffold and Change
ASSESSMENT TOOLS FOR DIAGNOSIS
11
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Phase 14: Revisit and Renew Mission
Integrity is the foundation on which trust and respect are built. Integrity has to be in the forefront
of every interaction whether that is with students, parents, school management, or the
community. The teaching profession is trusted by the public requiring the highest ideals of
professional service. The foundation of this trust is integrity. Guard integrity at all levels
personally and professionally.
Assessment Tools for Planning or Diagnosis
2
1
Less Than
Unsatisfactory
Satisfactory
0.00%
74.00%
3
Satisfactory
79.00%
4
Good
87.00%
5
Excellent
100.00%
70.0 %Content
25.0 %Explain An explanation An
An explanation An explanation An explanation
the Tools Use of the
explanation of of the
of the
of the
As Planning or reasoning for the reasoning reasoning for reasoning for reasoning for
Diagnostic
choosing the for choosing choosing the choosing the choosing the
tool and a
the tool and a tool and a
tool and a
tool and a
determination determination determination determination determination
of the tool
of the tool
of the tool
of the tool
of the tool
being used for being used for being used for being used for being used for
planning or
planning or
planning or
planning or
planning or
diagnostic is diagnostic is diagnostic is diagnostic is diagnostic is
not present.
present, but
clearly
clearly
clearly
incomplete. presented.
presented.
presented.
Discussion is Discussion is Discussion is Discussion is
barely evident. perfunctory. convincing.
thorough.
25.0 %Apply The instrument The instrument The instrument The instrument The instrument
the
has been
has been
has been
has been
has been
Collaborative applied, but an applied and an applied and an applied and an applied and an
Planning and analysis is not analysis is
analysis is
analysis is
analysis is
Diagnostic
present.
present, but
presented.
clearly
clearly
Instrument
incomplete. Discussion is presented.
presented.
and Analyze
Discussion is perfunctory. Discussion is Discussion is
Your
barely evident. Scholarly
convincing.
thorough.
Responses
One or more research
Scholarly
Scholarly
elements is
sources are
research
research
missing and/or topic-related, sources are
sources are
an included
but the source topic-related, topic-related,
source(s) is not and quality of and obtained and obtained
scholarly
one reference from reputable from highly
research or
is questionable. professional respected,
topic-related.
sources.
professional,
original
sources.
20.0 %Discuss A discussion A discussion A discussion of A discussion A discussion of
the Theoretical of the
of the
the theoretical of the
the theoretical
Foundations theoretical
theoretical
foundations for theoretical
foundations for
for Your
foundations for foundations your responses foundations for your responses
Responses
your responses for your
is presented. your responses is clearly
is not present. responses is Discussion is is clearly
presented.
present, but
perfunctory. presented.
Discussion is
incomplete. Scholarly
Discussion is thorough.
Discussion is research
convincing.
barely evident. sources are
Scholarly
One or more topic-related, research
elements is
but the source sources are
missing and/or and quality of topic-related,
an inc …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment
