Unit 2 assignment box
Objective: To synthesise timetable principles, teacher supervision, and instructional leadership into a functional schedule.
Activity: Design a 1-week timetable for “St Marks Upper Basic school" with these constraints:
- 3 teachers sharing science labs or workshop
- Inclusion students requiring learning support
- 1 teacher with 50% administrative duties
- Mandatory staff meeting
Apply principles of:
-
- Curriculum oversight
- Student management
- Teacher workload balance
- Optimal learning timing
Deliverables:
- Visual timetable
- 300-word justification memo covering:
-
-
- Conflict resolution in scheduling
- . Pedagogical reasoning for subject sequencing
- Supervision strategy for shared spaces
-
-
You will upload this in the Unit 2 assignment box and it shall earn 10%
|
Criteria |
Excellent (5) |
Good (4) |
Satisfactory (3) |
Needs Improvement (2-1) |
Weight |
|
1. Visual timetable design |
Clear, well-organised, visually appealing; all constraints addressed creatively and accurately |
Mostly clear and organised; minor issues in constraint handling |
Basic clarity; some constraints not fully addressed |
Disorganised or missing key constraints |
25% |
|
2. Conflict resolution strategy |
Memo clearly explains how scheduling conflicts were anticipated and resolved with strong rationale |
Memo explains conflict resolution with reasonable clarity and logic |
Memo mentions conflicts but lacks depth or clarity |
Little to no explanation of conflict resolution |
15% |
|
3. Pedagogical sequencing rationale |
Strong justification for subject order based on learning theory and student needs |
Reasonable justification with some pedagogical insight |
Basic reasoning with limited pedagogical depth |
No clear rationale or pedagogical basis |
15% |
|
4. Supervision strategy for shared spaces |
Innovative and practical supervision plan; ensures smooth use of labs/workshop |
Adequate strategy with minor gaps in practicality |
Basic plan with limited detail or feasibility |
Poor or missing supervision strategy |
15% |
|
5. Application of timetabling principles |
Skillful integration of all four principles (1–5) with clear evidence in design and memo |
Most principles applied well; minor gaps |
Some principles applied; lacks cohesion |
Few or no principles applied effectively |
20% |
|
6. Professional presentation and memo quality |
Memo is concise, well-written, within word limit, and professionally formatted |
Memo is mostly clear and professional; slight issues with length or format |
Memo meets basic standards; some clarity or formatting issues |
Memo is unclear, poorly formatted, or off-topic |
10% |