Required books available at the Coop and Gutman library

• Bardach, Eugene. 2000. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis. CQ Press. Fourth Edition.
• Carter, J. 2014. A Call to Action. Women, Religion, Violence, and Power. New York. Simon and Schuster.
• Fowler, Frances. 2013. Policy Studies for Educational Leaders. An Introduction. Pearson.
• Pascale, R., Sterning, J. and Sterning, M. 2010. The Power of Positive Deviance. How Unlikely Innovators Solve the World’s
Toughest Problems. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.
• Reimers, F. and N. McGinn. 1997. Informed Dialogue. Using research to shape education policy around the world. ISBN. 0-
275-95443-9.
• Weiss, C. 1998. Evaluation. Methods for Studying Programs and Policies. New Jersey. Prentice Hall.

Class Schedule and Reading List

Part I. Introduction. Comparative and International Education

In this first part of the course we examine the comparative approach to study education and review the status of educational
opportunity around the world, identify some of the key factors that constrain the opportunity of children to learn, and examine what
goes on in schools and classrooms around the world.

Week 1: The purpose of comparison: What is comparative education? What is international education?
Thursday, September 3: Lecture
Monday, September 7: Labor Day. University Holiday. No Discussion Section on Monday, groups will reschedule to another day.
Readings: 173 pages + website
The readings and lecture this week introduce the field of comparative education, the institutions involved in international
development assistance, and the various modalities and impact of that work. With a case study we discuss how governments use
education policy to advance education and social objectives, and examine how international organizations work with governments to
advance education policy reform. We examine also the role of cross-national studies of educational achievement in supporting
education policy. We also begin to read the book ‘A Call to Action’ by former US President Jimmy Carter, an analysis of the many
ways in which women’s rights are denied around the world.
Study questions:

• What are the key ideas contained in the Inchun and Oslo Declarations of 2015? How can those ideas be expected to
influence national policy priorities?
• In what ways do frameworks that allow for comparative analysis of education needs, such as education needs in
emergency and conflict situations, influence national policy priorities and efforts?
• How can comparative education research inform our understanding of how schools can improve?
• What are some of the contributions and limitations of cross-national studies of achievement, such as PISA, to inform
policy?
• How can we assess whether an education policy is successful?

A Note on Readings:
Here’s a suggested plan to approach the readings. Begin reviewing the online sites of the international organizations involved in
policy and look to understand what kind of work they do, what their priorities are at the moment, and how they relate to each other.
Read then the Reimers chapter (Educating the children of the poor), for an overview of the global education movement and it’s
results. Read then the Nicolai et al background paper, as an example of how policy can benefit from cross-national and international
research, practice and development efforts.
Read the OECD report to understand what this cross-national study is measuring, what are the outcomes that it measures, and what
are the key results of the study?
Read the case study carefully, it will be the basis of a class discussion.
The chapters in Jimmy Carter’s book can be read at any time, they are very personable and engaging.
Required books:
 • Carter, J. 2014. A Call to Action. Women, Religion, Violence, and Power. New York. Simon and Schuster. Pages 1-31. [30
pages].

Case study:

• What makes a policy intervention successful. Part A. Harvard Kennedy School. Case Number 1928.1 (iPa©) [8 pages]

Course website:

• 2012. PISA 2012 Results: What Students Know and Can Do. Student Performance in Mathematics, Reading and
Science (Links to an external site.). Volume 1. Pages 1-78 [78 pages] (Links to an external site.)
• Reimers, F. (2015). Educating the Children of the Poor. A Paradoxical Global Movement. In Tierney, W. (Ed). Rethinking
Education and Poverty. Johns Hopkins University Press. In press [26 pages]

Online:

• Nicolai, S., S. Hine and J. Wales. 2015. Education in Emergencies and Protracted Crises (Links to an external site.).
Towards a Strengthened Response. Overseas Development Institute. [27 pages] (Links to an external site.)
• Review the website of the Oslo Education Summit (Links to an external site.)(Links to an external site.) (Links to an
external site.)
• Read the Oslo declaration (Links to an external site.) [2 pages] (Links to an external site.)
• Review the website of the World Education Summit in Korea (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.) (Links to
an external site.)
• Read the Incheon Declaration (Links to an external site.) [2 pages] (Links to an external site.)
• Review the website of the Global Partnership for Education. (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.)
• Review the website of US International Assistance (Links to an external site.) and compare USAID funding in two
countries and think about the reasons for the differences. (Links to an external site.)
• Review the website of Education lending of the World Bank (Links to an external site.) (Links to an external site.)
Week 2: What is Education Policy?
Thursday, September 10: Lecture
Monday, September 14: Discussion Section.
Readings: 197 pages
This week we examine the process of policy analysis, from problem definition to making recommendations. We examine how
research synthesis can inform policy recommendations, using research on barriers to the education of girls. We analyze education
policy initiatives in Brazil.
Study questions:

• What are the key steps of the process of policy analysis?

• How can reviews of research and practice inform the process of policy analysis? In what way could the review by King and
Winthrop be used in a specific country context you know well?
• As you think about the argument I develop in ‘How ideas matter for Equity’, how do the notions of studying positive
deviants and creating improvement networks relate to Fowler’s discussion of power and education policy?
• In the case study about policy reform in Brazil, what were the sources that provided impetus for the reforms discussed?
What sources of power were deployed by the reformers to advance their agenda?

A Note on Readings:
Read Bardach’s book carefully, his framework should help you write the final paper.
Read Fowler’s chapters, they provide a foundation to understand education policy.
Read the chapters in Carter’s book, they provide helpful context for the King and Winthrop reading.
Read King and Winthrop’s paper carefully, it’s an example of how to synthesize research to shape global policy conversations.
Read Reimers’ article, focusing on the notions of positive deviants and improvement networks.
Read the case study carefully, it will be the basis of a class discussion.
Required books:

• Bardach, E. 2000. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving. New York.
Chatham House Publishers. Part I. The Eightfold Path and Part II. Gathering Data for Policy Research. (Coop and Gutman
Library). isbn: 1889119296 [90 pages]
• Fowler, F. 2013. Policy Studies for Educational Leaders. Chapter 1. Policy: What It is and Where It comes From and Chapter
2. Power and Education Policy. [45 pages]
• Carter, J. 2014. A Call to Action. Women, Religion, Violence, and Power. New York. Simon and Schuster. Pages 32-59. [27
pages].
Case study:

• Tackling Poor Performance, Extreme Inequality, Public Compliance: Brazil’s Education Minister Forges a New Role for the
Ministry. Kennedy School of Government. KHS 423. (iPa©)

Online:

• King, E. and R. Winthrop. 2015. Todays Challenges for Girls Education. Brookings Institution. [18
pages] http://www.osloeducationsummit.no/pop.cfm?FuseAction=Doc&pAction=View&pDocumentId=63347 (Links to
an external site.)
• Reimers, F. 2014. How Ideas Matter for Equity in Education. Unicef. http://sowc2015.unicef.org/stories/how-ideas-
matter-to-advance-equity-in-education/ (Links to an external site.)

Week 3: Comparative cross-national studies.

Thursday, September 17: Lecture.
Monday, September 21: Discussion Section.
Readings: 206 pages + websites
Assignments: Track 2: Paper 1: Strategy Analysis Paper Due Thursday, September 17 at noon.
This week we study the history and uses of cross-national education studies. We review some of the findings of regarding
engagement and self-efficacy, and how they relate to student achievement, and discuss their implications for education policy.
Finally, we discuss the concept of ‘transfer’ in education, and review what adaptations are necessary to appropriately transfer across
contexts.
Study questions:

• How does student engagement and self-efficacy of 15 year olds differ across countries? What is the relationship between
self-efficacy and academic achievement? Why are these various education outcomes of interest?
• How is educational opportunity modeled in Unequal Schools, Unequal Chances?
• Based on Saebones and colleagues’ paper, how can you use those ideas to shape education policy in ways that advances
the opportunities of students with disabilities?

A Note on Readings:
Read Reimers, Cook and Hashmi’s chapter carefully.
Read Saebones et al. background paper, as an example of how comparative analysis can inform global policy dialogue and agenda
setting.
Skim the OECD report, familiarize yourself with the non-academic outcomes measured and with the findings.
Skim Reimers chapter to familiarize yourself with the framework of educational opportunity as a series of transitions.
Skim the websites
Course website:

• OECD. 2012. PISA 2012 Results: Students’ Engagement, Drive and Self-Beliefs (Links to an external site.). Volume 3.
Pages 1-104 [103 pages]
• Reimers, F. (2000). Unequal Schools, Unequal Chances. Harvard University Press. Chapter 4, Pages 55-111. (iPa©) [56
pages]
 • Reimers, F., N. Cooc and J. 2011. Adapting Innovations Across Borders to Close Equity Gaps in Education. In: Heymann, J.
and A. Cassola (Eds.) Lessons in Educational Equality. Successful Approaches to Intractable Problems Around the World.
New York. Oxford University Press. Pages 315-339. (iPa©) [24 pages]

Online:

• Sæbønes, A.M., et al. 2015. Towards and Disability Inclusive Education (Links to an external site.). [23 pages]
• Study this website (Links to an external site.):
• Study this website (Links to an external site.):
• Study this website (Links to an external site.):

Week 4: Goals and Purposes of Education

Thursday, September 24: Lecture
Monday, September 28: Discussion Section
Reading: 234 pages
Assignments: Track 1: Paper 1: Problem Identification Paper Due on Thursday, September 24 at noon.
This week we examine varied purposes of schools which have been formulated over time and across countries, and in class examine
how Singapore went about shifting education purposes over time towards a 21st century skills perspective. We examine the
relationship between these education purposes and contemporary social science about knowledge and skills with valuable long term
outcomes as synthesized in a recent National Research Council Report.
25-27 September the Summit for the Adoption of the Post-2015 Goals.
Study questions:

• How do the readings describe the process by which governments shift education goals and the instruments to support
such shifts? How do those relate to values and ideologies?
• Compare and contrast the education goals proposed in ‘Learning, the treasure within’ with the synthesis presented by
Pellegrino and Hilton.
 • In the historical development of education in Singapore, the country has emphasized various goals over time. What
various goals can you identify in different stages of this historical process?
• This week, the delegates meeting at the United Nations, have agreed on new development goals –the Post-2015 Goals.
What are the education goals, how are they different from past UN goals, and how will the pursuit of those goals help
students develop the competencies Pellegrino and Hilton describe?
• How have the discussion in the UN addressed the challenges to women’s rights that Carter describes in his book?

A Note on Readings:
Read Coh’s chapter carefully.
Skim the Delors Report and the Hilton and Pellegrino, pay particular attention to the tables that present a taxonomy of skills,
synthesizing the Hilton and Pellegrino review.
Read Fowler’s chapter.
Read Carter’s chapter.
Required books:

• Fowler, F. 2013. Policy Studies for Educational Leaders. Chapter 5. Values and Ideology. [32 pages]Carter, J. 2014.
• A Call to Action. Women, Religion, Violence, and Power. New York. Simon and Schuster. Pages 60-113 [53 pages]

Online:

• Coh, C.B. and S. Gopinathan (2008). The Development of Education in Singapore Since 1965 (Links to an external site.).
Lee, S.K., C.B. Goh, B. Fredriksen and J.P.Tan (Eds). Towards a Better Future. Education and Training for Economic
Development in Singapore since 1965.Washington, DC. The World Bank. Pages 12-38. [26 pages]
• Delors, J. et al. Learning, the Treasure Within. Report to UNESCO of the International Commission for Education in the
21st (Links to an external site.)Pages 1-46. (Links to an external site.)[46 pages]
• Pellegrino, J. & Hilton, M. (Eds.) (2012). Education for Life and Work: Developing Transferable Knowledge and Skills in the
21stCentury (Links to an external site.). Washington, DC: National Research Council. Pages 1-67. [67 pages]
Part II. The Process of Policy Analysis
In this second part of the course we review the process of policy formation and discuss alternative approaches to understand how
policy is formulated and the role education research and evaluation can play in this process.

Week 5: Education policy making and implementation.

Thursday, October 1: Lecture
Monday, October 5: Discussion Section
Readings: 193 pages
Assignments: Track 2: Paper 2: Leadership Challenge Analysis Paper Due on Thursday, October 1 at noon.
This week we discuss the process of policy formation as a staged process. We discuss also alternative ways to conceptualize the
relationship between policy and research and knowledge utilization.
Study questions:

• Can you identify examples of Agenda Setting in readings for previous classes.
• What are the key differences between the three ways to portray the relationship between research and policy in Informed
Dialogue?
• How would you apply the model of ‘Dialogue as Co-construction’ to the process of textbook education reform in Kerala?

A Note on Readings:
Read Fowler carefully.
Read Reimers and McGinn, with particular attention to the three perspectives to conceptualize the relationship between research
and policy.
Read the case study of Kerala, it will be the basis of a discussion in class.
Required books:

• Fowler, F. 2013. Policy Studies for Educational Leaders. Chapter 6. The Major Education Policy Actors. Chapter 7. Setting
the Stage and Getting on It: Issue Definition and Agenda Setting. Chapter 10. Policy Implementation: Getting People to
Carry Out a Policy. [50 pages]
• Reimers, F. and N. McGinn. Informed Dialogue. (Pp. 3-126). (Coop and Gutman Library). ISBN: 0275954420 and
0275954439. [123 pages]

Case Study:

• Implementing Education Reform In India: The Primary School Textbook Debate and Resistance to Change in Kerala.
Kennedy School of Government Case C15-00-1573-0 (iPa©) [20 pages]

Week 6: Assessing the performance of an education system.

Thursday, October 8: Lecture.
Monday, October 12: Columbus Day. Because Monday is a University Holiday the Discussion Section will take place on Thursday
October 15th.
Readings: 198 pages
This week we discuss the methodology of education sector analysis and expand on the concept of policy formation as learning. We
discuss the social context of policymaking and the approaches that can maximize opportunities for social learning, implementation
and sustainability of reform. We will also have a conversation w Hans Brattskar, former Secretary of State of Norway, to discuss the
Oslo Summit and the definition of international education development priorities in Norway.
Study questions:

• How can an education sector assessment contribute to the process of education reform?
 • What role does Pratham play in education agenda setting in the various phases of its evolution? How does education
policy analysis play a role?

A Note on Readings:
Read Fowler’s chapter.
Skim the cases in Reimers and McGinn. The introductory section in each case describes which of the three perspectives is illustrated
by the case.
Read the case study of Pratham, it will be the basis of discussion in class.
Read Kemmerer’s book on sector analyses.
Required Book:

• Fowler, F. 2013. Policy Studies for Educational Leaders. Chapter 9, Looking at Policies: Policy Instruments and Cost
Effectiveness. [28 pages]

• Reimers, F. and N. McGinn. Informed Dialogue. Chapters 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 12. Pages 127-176. [49 pages]

Online:

• Kemmerer, F. Utilizing Education and Human Resource Sector Analyses (Links to an external site.). [98 pages]

Case Study:

• Pratham—Every Child in School and Learning WellLinks to an external site.. Harvard Business School 9-111-001. (iPa©)
[23 pages]

Week 7: Policy and Program Evaluation

[Note that this week the order is reversed, we begin with a discussion of the lecture on education sector assessments and
workshops on evaluation, and then have the lecture on evaluation]
Thursday, October 15: Workshop Policy and Program Evaluation
Monday, October 19: Lecture.
Readings: 154 pages
This week we study program evaluation and its role in policy reform and implementation. We examine the issues involved in framing
an evaluation, the key decisions involved in evaluation design and data collection.
Study questions:

• How is a program evaluation similar and different to an education sector assessment?

• What questions can a program evaluation answer? How are those relevant to reformulating an education policy? What
decisions can be informed by program evaluation?
• In what ways can design support the establishment of causal inference about a program? Why is causal inference
important?

A Note on Readings:
Read Carol Weiss’ book and Fowler’s chapter.
Skim the booklet by Anderson and Postlewhaite.
Required books:

• Fowler, F. 2013. Policy Studies for Educational Leaders. Chapter 11. Policy Evaluation: Determining if the Policy Works. [22
pages]

• Weiss, C. 1998. Evaluation. Methods for Studying Programs and Policies. New Jersey. Prentice Hall. Chapters 1, 2, 3, 4.
Pages 1-96. [96 pages]
Online:

• Anderson, L. and Postlewhaite, N. 2007. Program Evaluation. Large Scale and Small Scale
Studies. http://www.iaoed.org/files/8_web_030407.pdf (Links to an external site.) [36 pages]

Week 8: Learning from What works and from Grassroots innovators.

Thursday, October 22. Lecture
Monday, October 26. Discussion Section
Readings: 162 pages
Assignments: Track 1: Paper 2: Literature Review Paper Due on Thursday, October 22 at noon
Track 2: Paper 3: Literature Review Paper Due on Thursday, October 22 at noon
This week we discuss how educational innovation can be generated at the grassroots and examine an approach to learn from those
‘positive deviants’. We discuss also the notion of continuous improvement and the role of teachers integrated in improvement
networks in generating knowledge to guide the improvement process. We also examine, the implications of a decentralized
approach to innovation for the education work of a corporate social actor in Brazil.
Study questions:

• What is a positive deviant, and what processes can help us identify them and document them in a way that is valuable for
future education policy analysis and programming.
• What is an improvement network in education? What role does the study of positive deviants play in improvement
networks?
• In what ways can international development institutions support the growth and scalability of grassroots innovations, and
in what ways can they stunt that growth?
• Think about the recommendations presented in Carter’s book to address gender inequalities. How could you build on the
concept of positive deviants and improvement networks to advance those ideas?
A Note on Readings:
Read Bardach’s chapter.
Read chapters 1 and 6 in Pascale et al, and skim the appendix.
Read the case study about Itau in Brazil, it will be the basis of class discussion.
Read Carter’s book, with attention to the recommendations in the last chapter and particularly to the discussion of the role of
education in addressing gender inequalities.
Required books:

• Bardach, E. 2000. A Practical Guide for Policy Analysis: The Eightfold Path to More Effective Problem Solving. New York.
Chatham House Publishers. Part III. Smart (Best) Practices Research: Understanding and Making Use of What Look Like
Good Ideas from Somewhere Else. (Coop and Gutman Library). isbn: [40 pages]
• Pascale, R., Sterning, J. and Sterning, M. 2010. The Power of Positive Deviance. How Unlikely Innovators Solve the
World’s Tougest Problems. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business Review Press. Chapter 1. Against All Odds (pages 1-18),
Chapter 6 Girl Soldiers in Uganda (pages 149-170), and Appendix. Basic Field Guide to the Positive Deviance (PD)
Approach (pages 195-207). [12 pages]
• Carter, J. 2014. A Call to Action. Women, Religion, Violence, and Power. New York. Simon and Schuster. Pages 114-198. [84
pages].

Case Study:

• Education and Participation Award: Itau-UNICEF Partnership? Social Enterprise Knowledge Network. (iPa©) [26 pages]

Part III: Education Policy Options

Week 9: Curriculum, Standards and Assessment.

Thursday, October 29: Lecture. (Track 1. Second Paper Due) (Track 2. Third Paper Due).
Monday, November 2: Discussion Session.
Readings: 153 pages + website
This week we examine how notions of education for the 21st century translate into standards, curriculum and accountability systems.
We discuss the logic of standards based reforms, its promise and shortcomings. We compare how the notions of education for the
21st century play out into policy frameworks in several countries.
Study questions:

• Compare and contrast Canada’s and Massachusetts frameworks for 21st century education.
• What are the implications of 21st century education for education improvement in the developing world? What are the
challenges? In the context of a setting you know, what recommendations would you make so that efforts to improve
education also make it relevant to the 21st

A Note on Readings:
Read Fowler’s chapter
Read Reimers and Villegas chapter on Evolving the US Reform Movement.
Read one of the remaining online readings, and skim the rest.
Books:

• Fowler, F. 2013. Policy Studies for Educational Leaders. Chapter 12. Education Policy in the United States: Retrospective
and Prospective. [27 pages]

Online:
 • Reimers, F. and Villegas-Reimers, E. 2014. Getting to the Core and Evolving the Education Movement to a System of
Continuous Improvement (Links to an external site.). New England Journal of Public Policy. Fall/Winter 2014. Vol26. Issue 1.
Pp. 186-205. [19 pages] (Links to an external site.)
• ACTS Draft While Paper. Defining 21st Century SkillsLinks to an external site.. University of Melbourne. pp. 1-56 [56
pages]
• Future Tense. Adapting Canadian Education Systems for the 21st (Links to an external site.). (Links to an external
site.) [16 pages]
• Partnership for 21st century skills. Framework for 21st century learning. http://www.p21.org/ (Links to an external site.)
• School Reform in the New Millenium. Preparing all children for 21st century skill success (Links to an external site.). [ 30
pages}

Week 10: Teacher Education

Thursday, November 5. Lecture. Guest Speaker, Professor Eleonora Villegas-Reimers, Wheelock College
Monday, November 9. Veterans Day. No Discussion Section this day. Groups will reschedule to another day.
Readings: 190 pages
This week we review research and practice on the factors that influence the teaching profession. We discuss the process of
induction into the profession, initial preparation and ongoing development. We examine how intentional policy initiatives can
influence levers that shape the profession, and examine comparative evidence on how teacher education policies influence
instructional quality in a range of different countries.
Study questions:

• What is the emerging wisdom from cross national and comparative studies on the role of the teaching profession in high
performing countries?
• How can the policy initiatives undertaken in Singapore to influence the teaching profession inform efforts in different
country settings? What ideas can transfer? What ideas should be adapted?
• What are the implications of the findings documented in the PISA studies for policies influencing the teaching profession?
A Note on Readings:
Read Lee and Low’s chapter on Singapore.
Skim the PISA results.
Read Villegas-Reimers book.
Skim Cooper et al.
Course website:

• Lee, Sing Kong and Ee Ling Low. 2014. Conceptualizing Teacher Preparation for Educational Innovation: Singapore’s
Approach. In Lee, S.K., W.O. Lee and E.L. Low. 2014. Educational Policy Innovations. Levelling Up and Sustaining
Educational Achievement. Springer. Pages 49-70. (iPa©) [21 pages]
• 2012. PISA 2012 Results: What Makes Schools Successful? Resources, Policies and Practices. Volume IV. Pages 93-126
[33 pages] OECD. 2012. PISA 2012 Results: What Makes Schools Successful? Resources, Policies and Practices. Volume
IV. Pages 93-126 [33 pages] (Links to an external site.)

Online:

• Villegas-Reimers, E. (2003). Teacher professional development: An international review of the literature (Links to an
external site.). Paris: International Institute for Educational Planning. Pages 11-18 and 67-144 [77 pages] (Links to an
external site.)
• Cooper, J. and Alvarado, A. 2006. Preparation, Recruitment and Retention of School Teachers (Links to an external
site.). International Academy of Education. (Links to an external site.)[36 pages]
• Investing in Teachers in Investing in Learning. Background paper to the Oslo Summit (Links to an external site.). (Links to
an external site.) [23 pages]

Week 11: School Leadership

Thursday, November 12: Lecture
Monday, November 16: Discussion Section
Readings: 139 pages
This week we discuss the role of school and system level leaders in advancing the implementation of educational policy. We discuss
leadership for maintenance and stability of effective performance as well as leadership to advance new school purposes. We review
the implications of comparative research on education leadership.
Study questions:

• Identify the factors that the PISA study portrays as key to school effectiveness and trace how school leaders could
influence those factors.
• In what way can leadership standards influence the practice of education leadership. Identify the standards for elementary
school leaders in two different countries, and compare them and draw out the implications for school functioning and
improvement.

A Note on Readings:
Read the OECD report
Read Chapman’s book.
Read the case study of Chile, it will be the basis of class discussion.
Course website:

• 2012. PISA 2012 Results: What Makes Schools Successful? Resources, Policies and Practices (Links to an external
site.). Volume IV. Pages 1-70 [70 pages] OECD. 2012. PISA 2012 Results: What Makes Schools Successful? Resources,
Policies and Practices. Volume IV.

Case study:

• Education in Chile: A Venue for Individual, Business, and Community Involvement. (iPa©) [21 pages]
Online:

• Chapman, J. 2005. Recruitment, Retention and Development of School Principals (Links to an external site.). International
Academy of Education. [47 pages]

Week 12: System Reform

Thursday, November 19: Lecture
Monday, November 23: Discussion Section
Readings: 247 pages
This week we discuss the process of changing education systems, and the role of international development assistance in this
process. We examine a number of country cases, and tease out common characteristics of the process of leading change.
Study questions:

• In what way does the South Korean educational change confirm or challenge the principles identified by Ben Levin, to
characterize systemic improvement efforts?
• What role does international assistance play in the long term reforms described in ‘The Power of Persistence…’, what are
common patterns across the various country case studies, and what differences across countries are interesting.
• Situate yourself in the position of advising an organization that can effect systemic change in a country you know well.
What advice would you offer, based on the readings this week?

A Note on Readings:
Read Levin’s book.
Read Cho’s chapter.
Skim USAID’s book, read ONE of the case studies carefully.
Online:

• Levin, B. 2012. System Wide Improvement in Education (Links to an external site.). International Academy of
Education. (Links to an external site.) [40 pages]
• Cho, Y. The Light and Shadow of Educational Achievement in South Korea with Suggestions for Levelling Up. In Lee, S.K.,
W.O. Lee and E.L. Low. 2014. Educational Policy Innovations. Levelling Up and Sustaining Educational Achievement.
Springer. Pages 123-142. (iPa©) [19 pages]
• Equip 2. The Power of Persistence. Education System Reform and Aid Effectiveness (Links to an external site.). Case
Studies in Long-Term Education Reform. (Links to an external site.)[188 pages]

Thursday, November 26. Thanksgiving

Track 2: Paper 4: 21st Century Skills Case Study due Thursday, December 3 at noon

Track 1: Paper 3: Policy Recommendation Research Paper due Thursday, December 17 at noon
Track 2: Paper 5: Final Reflection due Thursday, December 17 at noon
Assignments:
Participation in Lecture and Section. All participants in the course are expected to come prepared to discuss the readings in class
sections (this will count for 20% of your final grade). For the classes in which cases are assigned, students should read and prepare
the case, ready to engage in the case discussion. Participation in section provides the opportunity to develop the ability to present
ideas effectively as well as the ability to listen to others and identify the main direction of a conversation and contribute in ways that
advance it in constructive ways in contrast to the common, and less productive, experience of team members talking past each other
or to themselves. In addition, each participant is expected to do the following:
Track 1: Individual Policy Analysis. This work can be done individually or in pairs.
Paper 1: Problem Statement/Identification of a Policy Issue. Write a five-page double spaced memo identifying an education policy
issue that is relevant to the opportunities of children to learn in a country or region of your choice. Explain why this issue is
important and provide appropriate empirical evidence to justify your claims. For example, you could talk about access issues–about
the exclusion of particular groups from the opportunity to be schooled—or you could talk about quality issues, you could talk about
the relevance of education for employment opportunities, you could talk about inequalities in accessing quality education, you could
talk about efficiency issues in the use of education resources. In this paper, avoid identifying a “pseudo-problem” which is simply the
absence of the solution (policy or program) that is of interest to you. Instead, push yourself to focus on an empirically documented
need or problem. In this paper, you need not (and should not) attempt to provide a solution to the problem identified. You will
explore alternative “solutions” in Paper 2.
This paper is due on Thursday, September 24, 2015 by noon EST. Students are encouraged to write about an issue that they wish to
focus on for the rest of the semester. This paper must be done individually and will account for 20% of your final grade.

A note on empirical research: Empirical research is a particular form of discourse that differs from anecdotal observations or speculative
argument; but a form of discourse where the claims made are supported by qualitative/quantitative/research evidence. Evidence is generated by
systematic efforts to describe reality such as testing the competencies of students, their attitudes, assessing teacher practice, school organization,
the implementation of curriculum and interventions and the like, and historical analysis. Research is generally published in specialized journals,
and evaluation reports, it can include comparative education articles, journal articles, books or reports about single national education systems,
synthesis of other research, etc.
Research differs from essays --arguments and claims not explicitly supported by evidence-- or from newspaper articles or on reflections from
personal experience. Newspaper articles, materials from apocryphal sources, marketing materials or speculative or fiction writing are not
appropriate to substantiate your claims in policy analysis.

Paper 2: Literature Review and Implications for Policy. The minister of education a country or jurisdiction in which you are working
has asked you to write a brief paper to guide her thinking on one of the key policy issues in education in that jurisdiction. In this
paper you will identify the issue (which may be—but does not necessarily have to be—the same issue you identified in the first
assignment), review the expert academic and professional literature regarding that issue, identify more than one policy alternative to
address, the issue, and you will conclude by making a brief recommendation (you will explore your recommendation more fully in the
third (final) paper). It is important that you use literature to inform your analysis of these alternatives.
In order to fulfill the minister’s requirement, your paper should:

• Identify the issue clearly

• Use evidence to explain why this issue is important
• Conduct a literature review which:
o Reviews pertinent empirical research on the issue (in the specific jurisdiction or internationally)
o Reviews the effects of policies, programs and practices which have been used to address it (policy or program
alternatives)
o Discuss the key implications of the literature for policy decisions
• Make a brief recommendation
• Focus on telling a story that is consistent, articulate and crisp
• Be a maximum of 10 pages, double spaced.

This paper will comprise 20% of your grade and is due Thursday October 29, 2015 by noon.
Paper 3: Final Policy Analysis Paper. Write a policy analysis research-based paper which proposes a policy, program or other national
level initiative to improve education in a specific country. In this paper, review pertinent research literature and formulate program
or a set of policy recommendations to address the issue you have identified (similar to what you were asked to do in Papers 1 and 2).
This paper should integrate research and analytic frameworks discussed in different sessions of the course (for example:
Bardach’s Eightfold Path or Logical Frameworks), but you are also welcome to go beyond the readings in this course to provide
evidence for your paper.
This paper should have a maximum of 25 double-spaced pages and will count for 40% of the final grade. The paper is due Thursday,
December 17, 2015 by noon.

NOTE: It may be possible to substitute the final research paper for a paper that reflects a project in which students are involved—a program or
project evaluation, a policy analysis or a publication or for an analysis of a program, project or policy that is aimed at developing 21st century
skills. The paper needs to provide evidence of knowledge gained in this course. Students interested in pursuing this option will submit a two-
page proposal outlining the paper, describing the proposed project and how it will provide evidence of the skills gained in this course. This
proposal is due on Thursday, October 8.
Summary Schedule and Weight of Assignments for Track 1:

1. Class participation. Attendance and contribution to scheduled classes, sections and other opportunities. 20% of final
grade.
2. Paper 1: Problem Statement/Identification of a Policy Issue (5 pages). Due Thursday, September 24 th by noon. 20% of final
grade.
3. Paper 2: Literature Review and Implications for Policy (10 pages) Due on Thursday, October 29 by noon. 20% of final
grade.
4. Paper 3: Final Policy Analysis Paper (25 pages). Due on Thursday, December 17th by noon. 40% of final grade.

All papers must be submitted in the Assignment section on the course website by noon on the due date.
Grading Rubrics For Papers 1-3 in Track 1
Track 1: Criteria for evaluating Paper 1: Problem Statement/Identification of a Policy Issue

Grades A B C D

- Clearly identifies an - Identifies an issue for - Policy issue is not

education problem that can policy clearly identified
be addressed through policy Shows effort to
interventions complete assignment
- Argument not fully but fails to fulfill basic
- Some arguments
Content developed or supported requirements
unclear or unsupported
- Focuses on one country or by evidence
region and provides a brief
description of that context
- Relies on conjecture,
personal experience, or
 - Provides a pertinent speculation rather than
description of the problem, empirical data
supported by empirical data

- Identifies a pseudo-
- Articulates a clear problem which is merely
argument regarding the the absence of the
importance of the issue for solution (policy or
policy program) of interest to
the author

- Is organized and written

logically and clearly,
without errors that may
prohibit comprehension Organization and
presentation of the
- Is organized and written
paper prohibits
logically and clearly - Includes writing and
- Ideas are explained comprehension of the
Writing: style, organization errors that core argument of the
clearly - Ideas need further
organization, seriously prohibit paper.
development
comprehension
- Lacks focus
- Language is precise;
words are used
parsimoniously
-
Assignment Fulfills more than 75% of Fulfills less than 75% of Fulfills less than 50%
Fulfills instructions
Instructions instructions instructions of instructions
Track 1: Criteria for evaluating Paper 2: Literature Review and Implications for Policy
Grades A B C D

- Clearly identifies a policy

challenge
- Satisfies the core paper - Shows effort to
requirements respond to
- Focuses on one country or assignment but
region and provides a significantly lacking
description of the policy
challenge supported by relevant - Argumentation about the in key areas
relevance of the policy including: - Shows effort to
data sources
challenge to selected complete assignment
- Identification of
country or region is but fails to clearly
policy challenge
underdeveloped identify a policy
- Synthesizes the central - Description of challenge
Content arguments and findings context
advanced by research literature
on the selected policy challenge - Weak use of research - Use of evidence
- Fails to use research
- Analysis to support argument

- Identifies original implications - May not reflect an

of this research for policy in original or unique analysis
the given context, of the policy challenge
suggesting specific policy
alternatives

- Provides a brief policy or

program recommendation based
 on the research and arguments
presented in the paper

- Is organized and written

logically and clearly, without
errors that may prohibit - Contains writing and
comprehension organizational errors - Writing errors
prohibit - Writing errors
comprehension prohibit comprehension
- Contains a clear introduction, - Missing or has
a conclusion, and arguments weaknesses in one or two
follow a logical sequence of the - Missing or has - Missing or has
supported by evidence, and following: introduction, weaknesses weaknesses
thoughtful transitions conclusion, and in: introduction, in: introduction,
conclusion, and conclusion, and
Writing logic and flow of
arguments logic and flow of logic and flow of
- Content is of appropriate arguments arguments
range and depth
- Errors in use and citation
of sources - Errors in use and - Lacks citation of
- Sources are varied, research- citation of sources sources and references
based and cited appropriately and reference list
- Reference page contains
errors in formatting
- Contains an appropriately
formatted reference page
Assignment Fulfills more than 75% of Fulfills less than 75% Fulfills less than 50%
Fulfills instructions
Instructions instructions of instructions of instructions
Track 1: Criteria for evaluating Paper 3: Final Policy Analysis

A B C D

Identifies a problem in education Satisfies the basic Shows serious effort Shows effort to
that needs to be addressed requirements of the to define and respond complete
assignment to a policy issue assignment but is
seriously deficient
Focuses on a specific country or in multiple ways
Content Definition of barrier or Lacks evidence to making it an
region
other key aspects of the define the problem insufficient
framing of the problem and the proposed response to the
may be underdeveloped response assignment
Provides relevant descriptive data
on the selected problem
 Makes only partial use of Program is
the pertinent research incomplete and
Justifies the need for action to literature infeasible
address the problem

Program is incomplete or Missing multiple key

Critically summarizes pertinent unfeasible elements that hinders
research literature (from the course comprehension
readings and elsewhere) related to
the issue
Missing one or two key
elements that hinders
comprehension
Proposes a detailed and
systematic program to address the
problem, informed by the research
literature reviewed
Applies one of the analytic
frameworks from the course

Is organized and written logically

Contains errors in writing Writing errors Writing errors
and clearly, without errors that
and organization prohibit prohibit
may prohibit comprehension
comprehension comprehension

Writing - Missing or has

- Contains a clear introduction, a
weaknesses in one or two - Missing or has - Missing or has
conclusion, and arguments follow
of the weaknesses weaknesses
a logical sequence supported by
following: introduction, in: introduction, in: introduction,
evidence, and thoughtful
conclusion, and conclusion, and conclusion, and
transitions
 logic and flow of logic and flow of logic and flow of
arguments arguments arguments
- Content is of appropriate range
and depth
- Errors in use and citation - Errors in use and - Lacks citation of
of sources citation of sources sources and
- Sources are varied, research- and reference list references
based and cited appropriately
- Reference page contains
errors in formatting
- Contains an appropriately
formatted reference page

Assignment Fulfills more than 75% of Fulfills less than 75% Fulfills less than
Fulfills instructions
Instructions instructions of instructions 50% of instructions
Track 2: Working in partnership with a UNICEF Education Officer and with another student in the course.
Paper 1: Strategy Analysis. Read UNICEF’s Education Strategy. Synthesize it and compare with the education strategy of another
Education Organization (5 pages). This paper is due on Thursday, September 17th by noon and will count for 15% of your final grade.
Paper 2: Leadership Challenge Analysis. Interview an education office participating in Harvard’s Education Quality Leadership
Development Program. Discuss with them the leadership challenge they have identified in carrying out UNICEF’s strategy. Briefly
summarize their challenge and in the remaining pages (the bulk of the paper) discuss and analyze what you think are the implications
of this challenge for UNICEF’s strategy. Discuss in what ways the solution of this challenge might help students gain 21 st century
skills and advance educational opportunity in the country where the UNICEF specialist works (5 pages). This paper is due
on Thursday, October 1st by noon and will count for 15% of your final grade.
Paper 3: Literature Review. Conduct a review of research and best practices literature that is relevant to help address the leadership
challenge identified by the UNICEF education officer. Present this review to the Education officer and discuss possible implications
of that review for programmatic actions of UNICEF (10 pages). This paper is due on Thursday, October 29th by noon and will count
for 20% of your final grade.

A note on empirical research: Empirical research is a particular form of discourse that differs from anecdotal observations or speculative
argument; but a form of discourse where the claims made are supported by qualitative/quantitative/research evidence. Evidence is generated by
systematic efforts to describe reality such as testing the competencies of students, their attitudes, assessing teacher practice, school organization,
the implementation of curriculum and interventions and the like, and historical analysis. Research is generally published in specialized journals,
and evaluation reports, it can include comparative education articles, journal articles, books or reports about single national education systems,
synthesis of other research, etc.
Research differs from essays --arguments and claims not explicitly supported by evidence-- or from newspaper articles or on reflections from
personal experience. Newspaper articles, materials from apocryphal sources, marketing materials or speculative or fiction writing are not
appropriate to substantiate your claims in policy analysis.

Paper 4: 21st Century Skills Case Study. Write a case study of a program that attempts to develop 21st century skills. Using the
framework presented in Pellegrino and Hilton’s book, discuss which skills are targeted by the program, what activities are intended
to foster those skills, what evidence is there of impact, what scale has this program reached, what factors have supported the
implementation and scaling of this program, what constraints have affected implementation. Propose a plan to evaluate this
program. This case study does not need to be related to the Leadership Challenge (20-25 pages). This paper is due on Thursday,
December 3rd by noon.
Paper 5: Final Reflection. Share Paper 4 with UNICEF education specialist and discuss relevancy and feasibility of ‘transferring’ the
innovation from Paper 4 to the context where this person works. Discuss what adaptations would be necessary to transfer this
program and integrated it with UNICEF’s education strategy. Write a reflective memo that summarizes what you learned from this
partnership with the UNICEF officer, including any final reflection on the literature review you conducted (5-10 pages). This paper is
due on Thursday, December 17th by noon.
Summary Schedule and Weight of Assignments for Track 2.
Class participation. Attendance and contribution to scheduled classes, sections and other opportunities. 20% of final grade.
Paper 1: Analysis of UNICEF’s Strategy (5 pages). Due Thursday September 10th by 5pm. 15% of final grade.
Paper 2: Discussion of leadership challenge of UNICEF’s education specialist (5 pages). Due Thursday, October 1 st by noon. 15% of
final grade.
Paper 3: Literature Review (10 pages) and discussion of policy implications of research on a topic that is germane to the leadership
challenge faced by UNICEF education specialist. Due on Thursday, October 29 by noon. 20% of final grade.
Paper 4: Case study innovation to foster 21st century skills (20-25 pages). Due on Thursday, December 3rd by noon. 20% of final
grade.
Paper 5: Reflection paper on a discussion of both case study and literature review with the UNICEF officer (5-10 pages). Due on
Thursday, December 17th by noon. 10% of final grade.
All papers must be submitted on the Assignments tab on the course website by noon on the due date.
Grading Rubrics For Track 2
Track 2: Criteria for evaluating Paper 1: Analysis of UNICEF Strategy:

Grades A B C D

- Clearly synthesizes the - Merely summarizes the

Content UNICEF Education - UNICEF Education Shows effort to
UNICEF Education
Strategy document Strategy document is complete assignment
Strategy document; no
 analysis of strengths and summarized, but not but fails to fulfill basic
opportunities. thoroughly requirements
- Provides a thoughtful
analysis of the strengths
and opportunities of the
UNICEF strategy in - Some arguments - Little or no independent
comparison to another unclear; logic is flawed thinking or analysis of
organization’s education the strategy by the
strategy student
- Relies on conjecture,
personal experience, or
- Students’ own thinking speculation rather - Arguments are not fully
and analysis makes up the than reasoned logic developed or supported
bulk of the paper

- Analysis is logical,
thoughtful, and well-
researched

- Organization and
- Is organized and written - Is organized and written presentation of the
logically and clearly, logically and clearly paper prohibits
without errors that may - Includes writing and comprehension of the
Writing: style, prohibit comprehension organization errors that core argument of the
organization, - Ideas need further seriously prohibit paper.
development comprehension
- Ideas are explained
clearly
 - Lacks focus or clear
outline
- Language is precise;
words are used
parsimoniously

Assignment Fulfills more than 75% of Fulfills less than 75% of Fulfills less than 50% of
Fulfills instructions
Instructions instructions instructions instructions
Track 2: Criteria for evaluating Paper 2: Analysis of UNICEF Officer Leadership Challenge:

Grades A B C D

- Clearly and briefly - The summary of the

- Summarizes (but not
summarizes the UNICEF UNICEF officer’s
fully or clearly) the
officer’s leadership UNICEF officer’s
leadership challenge is
challenge not at all clear
leadership challenge

- Provides a thoughtful - Fails to use the

- The leadership Shows effort to
analysis of leadership UNICEF Education
challenge’s connection to complete assignment
challenge’s connection to the UNICEF Education
Strategy effectively
but fails to fulfill basic
the UNICEF Education Strategy is touched upon, requirements
Content
Strategy, and what the but limited discussion of
implications are of the the implications of the - Fails to mention the
strategy on the challenge strategy on the challenge opportunity to promote
(and vice versa) (and vice versa) 21st century learning

- Suggests ways that the - Weak argument for - Fails to explain how
leadership challenge could ways that the leadership addressing the leadership
be used as an opportunity to challenge could be used challenge will advance
promote 21st century skills as an opportunity to educational opportunity
 promote 21st century
learning
- Explains how addressing - Little or no independent
the leadership challenge thinking or analysis of
will advance educational the strategy by the
opportunity in the UNICEF - Weak argument for student
officer’s country context ways that the leadership
challenge could be used
to advance educational
opportunity - Arguments are not fully
- Students’ own thinking developed or supported
and analysis are apparent
- Some arguments
unclear or unsupported
- Analysis is logical, by evidence; logic is
thoughtful, and well- flawed
researched

- Relies on conjecture,
personal experience, or
speculation rather than
empirical data and/or
reasoned logic

- Is organized and written

logically and clearly, - Is organized and written - Includes writing and - Organization and
Writing: style, without errors that may logically and clearly organization errors that presentation of the
organization, prohibit comprehension seriously prohibit paper prohibits
comprehension comprehension of the
 - Ideas are explained - Ideas need further core argument of the
clearly development paper.

- Language is precise; - Lacks focus

words are used
parsimoniously

Assignment Fulfills more than 75% of Fulfills less than 75% of Fulfills less than 50% of
Fulfills instructions
Instructions instructions instructions instructions

Track 2: Criteria for evaluating Paper 3: Literature Review

Grades A B C D

- Weak use of research,

- Reviews and discusses the including major gaps in - Shows effort to respond
Shows effort to
critical academic and to assignment but
literature reviewed complete assignment
specialized literature significantly lacking in
but fails to fulfill basic
related to the UNICEF key areas including:
Content requirements
officer’s leadership - Identification of
- Best practices are
challenge leadership challenge
general, impractical,
and/or not rooted in the
- Description of context
research evidence
- Provides a description and - Use of evidence
analysis of the best
practices that are suggested - Weak argument for the - Analysis
by your literature review implications of the
research
- Little or no independent
- Discusses the implications thinking or analysis of
of these best practices, - Weak argument for the the strategy by the
incorporating the input programmatic options student
from your talks with the recommended
UNICEF officer
- Arguments are not fully
- Some arguments developed or supported
- Suggests potential unclear or unsupported
programmatic actions that by evidence; logic is
the UNICEF officer could flawed
undertake based on the
above
- Relies on conjecture,
personal experience, or
- Students’ own thinking speculation rather than
and analysis are apparent empirical data and/or
reasoned logic

- Analysis is logical,
thoughtful, and well-
researched
 - Is organized and written
logically and clearly,
without errors that may
prohibit comprehension - Is organized and written - Organization and
logically and clearly presentation of the
paper prohibits
- Includes writing and comprehension of the
Writing: style, - Ideas are explained organization errors that
clearly - Ideas need further core argument of the
organization, seriously prohibit paper.
development
comprehension

- Language is precise;
words are used - Lacks focus
parsimoniously

Assignment Fulfills more than 75% of Fulfills less than 75% of Fulfills less than 50% of
Fulfills instructions
Instructions instructions instructions instructions
Track 2: Criteria for evaluating Paper 4: 21st Century Skills Case Study
Grades A B C D

- Identifies a program,
- Identifies and clearly policy, or project for - The program, project,
describes an interesting and study but the description or policy chosen in
useful program, policy, or is not thorough, not clear, poorly suited for this
project for study or not useful. assignment

- Uses the Pellegrino and - Weak use of the -Does not use the
Hilton framework to Pellegrino and Hilton Pellegrino and Hilton
identify the 21st century framework or unclear framework effectively
skill(s) targeted by the Shows effort to
identification of the
program, and analyzes the complete assignment
skill(s) developed by the
extent to which the but fails to fulfill basic
program - Little or no independent requirements
Content program is successful in
thinking or analysis of
developing those skills in
the strategy by the
students
- Lacking in detail student
regarding the activities,
evidence, and scale of the
- Clearly identifies the program - Arguments are not fully
activities that are intended
developed or supported
to foster those skills, the
evidence is there of impact,
- Weak analysis of the
the scale that this program
factors that have
has reached
supported or constrained
the implementation of the
program
 - Analyzes and describes
the factors which have
supported the - Some arguments
implementation and scaling unclear or unsupported
of this program, what by evidence; logic is
constraints have affected flawed
implementation

- Relies on conjecture,
- Proposes a realistic and personal experience, or
appropriate plan to speculation rather than
evaluation the program, empirical data and/or
project, or policy reasoned logic

- Students’ own thinking

and analysis are apparent

- Analysis is logical,
thoughtful, and well-
researched

- Is organized and written - Is organized and written - Organization and

logically and clearly, logically and clearly - Includes writing and presentation of the
Writing: style, without errors that may organization errors that paper prohibits
organization, prohibit comprehension seriously prohibit comprehension of the
- Ideas need further comprehension core argument of the
development paper.
 - Ideas are explained
clearly
- Lacks focus

- Language is precise;
words are used
parsimoniousl

Assignment Fulfills more than 75% of Fulfills less than 75% of Fulfills less than 50% of
Fulfills instructions
Instructions instructions instructions instructions
Track 2: Criteria for evaluating Paper 5: Literature Review
Grades A B C D

- Discusses the relevancy - Shows effort to respond

and feasibility of to assignment but
implementing a program, significantly lacking in
project, or policy like the key areas including:
- Discussion of the
one described in Paper 4 in feasibility or relevancy of - Discussion of
the UNICEF officer’s transfer of the case is feasibility or relevancy of
context, based on flawed the transfer of case
discussion with that officer
- Analysis of adaption
and consideration Shows effort to
- Analysis of adaptation
- Provides an analysis of complete assignment
and considerations is - Reflection
any adaptations or other but fails to fulfill basic
flawed
Content considerations that would requirements
need to be in place for the
transfer of the Paper 4 case - Little or no independent
to be successful in the - Provides a reflection on thinking or analysis of
officer’s context the collaboration, but not the strategy by the
a thoughtful or student
substantive one
- Reflects thoroughly and
thoughtfully on the - Arguments are not fully
strengths and weaknesses developed or supported
of the partnership between
the students and the
UNICEF officer
 - Provides a thoughtful
reflection on what the
students learned from their
partnership with the
UNICEF officer, the
partnership with another
student, and from the
course assignments,
especially the literature
review

- Is organized and written

logically and clearly,
without errors that may
prohibit comprehension - Is organized and written - Organization and
logically and clearly presentation of the
paper prohibits
- Includes writing and comprehension of the
Writing: style, - Ideas are explained organization errors that
clearly - Ideas need further core argument of the
organization, seriously prohibit paper.
development
comprehension

- Language is precise;
words are used - Lacks focus
parsimoniously
Assignment Fulfills more than 75% of Fulfills less than 75% of Fulfills less than 50% of
Fulfills instructions
Instructions instructions instructions instructions

(Links to an external site.)

Course Summary:
Date Details Due

Thu Sep 17, 2015 Assignment Track 2: Paper 1: Strategy Analysis (This work due by 12pm
must be done individually.)

Assignment Track 1: Policy Issue/Problem Statement (This

Thu Sep 24, 2015 due by 12pm
work can be done individually or in pairs.)

Assignment Track 2: Paper 2: Leadership Challenge Analysis

Thu Oct 1, 2015 due by 12pm
(This work is submitted as a group.)

Assignment Track 2: Paper 3: Literature Review (This work is

Thu Oct 29, 2015 due by 12pm
submitted as a group.)
Date Details Due

Assignment Track: 1 Paper 2: Literature Review and

Implications for Policy (This work can be done individually or due by 12pm
in pairs.)

Assignment Track 2: Paper 4: 21st Century Skills Case Study

Thu Dec 3, 2015 due by 12pm
(This work is submitted as a group.)

Assignment Track 1: Paper 3: Final Policy Analysis Paper

due by 12pm
(This work can be done individually or in pairs.)
Thu Dec 17, 2015
Assignment Track 2: Paper 5: Final Reflection (This work is
due by 12pm
submitted as a group.)

Assignment Limited Enrollment Instructions

Assignment Participation (Class and Lecture)

Assignment Track 2: Paper 1: Strategy Analysis (This work

must be done individually.)

Assignment Week 1: Canvas Orientation