MPL700: Assessment 2: Report
IT Help @Deakin
© 2020 Deakin University CRICOS Provider Code: 00113B Page 1 of 6
Key information

Due:
Weighting:
Word count:
Monday 8 February 2021 by 8.00pm (AEDST)
60 %
4000 words

Learning Outcomes
This assessment assesses the following Unit Learning Outcomes (ULO) and related Graduate Learning
Outcomes (GLO). At the completion of this Unit, successful students can:

Unit Learning Outcome (ULO) Graduate Learning Outcome (GLO)
ULO 1: Synthesise leadership theories and
critique their application in authentic
leadership contexts
GLO 1: Discipline-specific knowledge and
capabilities
GLO4: Critical thinking
ULO 2: Apply leadership theories to
complex leadership problems
GLO 1: Discipline-specific knowledge and
capabilities
ULO 3: Analyse their own leadership role
and make recommendations for change
GLO 4: Critical thinking

Purpose
This assessment task requires you to consolidate your understanding of the unit material as developed
throughout the unit, using this understanding to critically reflect on your learning as well as planning how
to improve your own leadership practice.
Instructions
This report incorporates five sections, as detailed on the next page. Recommended lengths for each
section are provided to assist in ensuring all aspects are appropriately covered within the required word
count (4000 words, excluding the reference list). Your report is to be submitted as a single Word
document.
Ensure you carefully review the assessment criteria as set out in the marking rubric on pages 5-6. These
are the performance levels/requirements against which your submission will be assessed.

MPL700: Assessment 2: Report
IT Help @Deakin
© 2020 Deakin University Page 2 of 6
Section 1: INTRODUCTION (approx 400 words)
Provide a brief introduction that:
Describes your workplace and currentrole
Identifies your aims for learning in thisunit:
o why did you elect to enrol in thisunit?
o why are you keen to improve your leadershippractice?
Section 2: LEADERSHIP THEORY (approx 1500 words)
Choose two of the theories/conceptual frameworks from this unit (see listing in table below) and
explain why they are the most useful for people seeking to practice more effective leadership in your
organisation or profession. Your explanation must note both the strengths and weaknesses of the
theories/conceptual frameworks (using academic references where appropriate) as well as draw from
the posts you and others made in FutureLearn when we discussed that particular theory/topic.

Trait theories of leadership Situational leadership
Behavioural theories of leadership Transformational leadership
Contingency theory of leadership Charismatic leadership
Path-goal theory of leadership Authentic leadership
Leader-member exchange (LMX) Servant leadership

Section 3: INFLUENCING OTHERS (approx 500 words)
Reflect on who you are seeking to influence in your current (or most recent) leadership role and why.
(You may want to influence a leader above you at work, a peer or sub-ordinate/team member(s).) To
do this, you will need to examine your own implicit leadership and followership theories and discern
how they impact on your ability to influence others.
Section 4: LEADERSHIP PRACTICE (approx 1000 words)
Develop three action points for how you might shift to be someone who actively practises leadership
more effectively. Clearly detail what is involved in each of these three areas and the specific actions
you will undertake. Explain why the three areas are important for you to implement, drawing on
theories and concepts from the unit (as well as your particular context) to justify your choices.
Section 5: CONCLUSION (approx 600 words)
For this final section, prepare a brief summary of Sections 2-4, which provides a synthesis of your key ideas
and planned actions. Reflect on whether or not you achieved your learning aims for the unit and what your
next stage of development might involve.

MPL700: Assessment 2: Report
IT Help @Deakin
© 2020 Deakin University Page 3 of 6
Assignment Format
All tasks should be submitted within a single Word document. Use clear headings for each of the five
sections, plus the reference list which should appear at the end.
Your submission (excluding the reference list) should total 4000 words (+/- 10%). Submissions that exceed
these requirements may not be read/assessed in full.
Referencing
Based on the assessment requirements, we would expect to see a minimum of eight (8) scholarly sources
to support your discussion. Both scholarly and non-scholarly sources that inform your discussion must be
appropriately acknowledged.
You must correctly use the Harvard method in this assessment. See the Deakin
referencing guide.
Submission details
Assessments are submitted via CloudDeakin. The link to the submission area can be found on
the ‘Assessments’ page of the MPL700 site on FutureLearn.
Deakin University has a strict standard on plagiarism as a part of Academic Integrity. To avoid any
issues with plagiarism, students are strongly encouraged to run the similarity check with the
Turnitin system, which is available through Unistart. A Similarity score MUST NOT exceed 39% in
any case.
Late submission
The following marking penalties will apply if you submit an assessment task after the due date without an
approved extension: 5% will be deducted from available marks for each day up to five days, and work that
is submitted more than five days after the due date will not be marked and will receive 0% for the task.
‘Day’ means working day for paper submissions and calendar day for electronic submissions. The Unit Chair
may refuse to accept a late submission where it is unreasonable or impracticable to assess the task after
the due date.
Calculation of the late penalty is as follows:
1 day late: submitted after Monday 11:59pm and before Tuesday 11:59pm– 5% penalty.
2 days late: submitted after Tuesday 11:59pm and before Wednesday 11:59pm – 10% penalty.
3 days late: submitted after Wednesday 11:59pm and before Thursday 11:59pm – 15% penalty.
4 days late: submitted after Thursday 11:59pm and before Friday 11:59pm – 20% penalty.
5 days late: submitted after Friday 11:59pm and before Saturday 11:59pm – 25% penalty.
Dropbox closes the Saturday after 11:59pm AEDT time.

IT Help @Deakin
© 2020 Deakin University Page 4 of 6
MPL700: Assessment 2: Report
Extension requests
Requests for extensions should be made to the Unit Chair well in advance of the assessment due date. If
you wish to seek an extension for an assignment, you will need to apply by email directly to Dr Lee Martin
(
[email protected]), as soon as you become aware that you will have difficulty in meeting the
scheduled deadline, but at least 3 days before the due date. When you make your request, you must
include appropriate documentation (medical certificate, death notice) and a copy of your draft
assignment.
Special consideration
You may be eligible for special consideration if circumstances beyond your control prevent you from
undertaking or completing an assessment task at the scheduled time.
See the following link for advice on the application process:
https://www.deakin.edu.au/students/studying/assessment-and-results/special-consideration
Assessment feedback
Marks and feedback for Assessment 2 will be available to students online following the University’s release
of final grades for Trimester 3 2020.
Academic integrity, plagiarism and collusion
Plagiarism and collusion constitute extremely serious breaches of academic integrity. They are forms of
cheating, and severe penalties are associated with them, including cancellation of marks for a specific
assignment, for a specific unit or even exclusion from the course. If you are ever in doubt about how to
properly use and cite a source of information refer to the referencing site above.
Plagiarism occurs when a student passes off as the student’s own work, or copies without
acknowledgement as to its authorship, the work of any other person or resubmits their own work from a
previous assessment task.
Collusion occurs when a student obtains the agreement of another person for a fraudulent purpose, with
the intent of obtaining an advantage in submitting an assignment or other work.
Work submitted may be reproduced and/or communicated by the university for the purpose of assuring
academic integrity of submissions:
https://www.deakin.edu.au/students/studying/academic-integrity
MPL700: Assessment 2: Report rubric
IT Help @Deakin
© 2020 Deakin University Page 5 of 6

Performance
Levels/ Criteria
N (0-29) N (30-49) P (50-59) C (60-69) D (70-79) HD (80-100)
Criterion 1:
Explanation
and critique of
relevant
leadership
theories
ULO1 (GLO1,
GLO4)
Discussion of
leadership is
superficial (including
little or no use of
credible sources).
Overall, the
submission
demonstrates a
lack
of critical thinking:
responses lack clarity
relevance and depth.
Discussion of
leadership theories
is appropriate
although the
discussion remains
superficial (including
limited use of
credible sources).
The overall
submission shows
limited evidence of
critical thinking
(clarity, logic,
relevance and
depth).
Discussion demonstrates
sound understanding of
the majority of leadership
theories covered (including
some use of credible
sources). The overall
submission provides
evidence of
developing
critical thought through
responses that are clear
and relevant to the
particular tasks.
Discussion of leadership
theories demonstrates a
strong understanding
(including
appropriate use
of credible sources). The
overall submission provides
evidence of a
good capacity
for critical thought,
integrating personal
experience with clear
discussion of the particular
tasks.
Leadership theories are
described
accurately and
precisely
(including skillful
use of credible sources).
The overall submission
demonstrates
a well
developed capacity
for
critical thought,
integrating personal
experience and insights
generated via multiple
sources of information.
Leadership theories are
described and critiqued to
demonstrate a
sophisticated
appreciation
of each in
understanding leadership
(including
very skillful use of
credible sources). The
overall submission
demonstrates clear and
unambiguous evidence of a
structured, logical process
of meaning- making,
synthesising
insights
generated via multiple
sources of information.
30 marks 0 – 8 9 – 14 15 – 17 18 – 20 21 – 23 24 – 30
Criterion 2:
Application of
leadership
theories
ULO2 (GLO1)
Little or no attempt is
made to consider the
potential applications
of theories and
concepts beyond the
given examples and
contexts.
The discussion
remains at the level
of theory
, and/or
within the examples
given.
Examples are provided that
demonstrate a
developing
ability to make connections
between different theories,
and between theory and
practice, and move beyond
those given in the course
materials.
Examples provided are
relevant and show a
developing capacity to
leverage theory
as a
method of justifying and
extending practice.
Examples provided are
concrete, relevant, and
illustrative
of how
leadership theories have
been
applied to own
context
to justify future
goals and directions.
Considerable attention is paid
to the provision of
concrete,
specific, and detailed
examples that demonstrate
the current and future
application
of these theories
for practice.
30 marks 0 – 8 9 – 14 15 – 17 18 – 20 21 – 23 24 – 30

MPL700: Assessment 2: Report rubric
IT Help @Deakin
© 2020 Deakin University Page 6 of 6

Performance
Levels/ Criteria
N (0-29) N (30-49) P (50-59) C (60-69) D (70-79) HD (80-100)
Criterion 3: Analysis
of own leadership
ULO3 (GLO4)
There is little or no
evidence of reflection
on self as leader, and
no attempt to analyse
or draw meaning from
this experience.
There is limited
evidence of reflection
on self as leader. Where
provided, the focus is
mainly on description,
with
limited evidence
of analysis (getting to
the meaning made of
the situation).
There is evidence of some
application
of new
knowledge to identify
issues in relation to self as
leader, including
some
evidence of analysis
(getting to the meaning
made of the situation),
although this is not always
the focus of the discussion.
There is evidence of
thoughtful application of
new knowledge and
others’ perspectives in
understanding self as
leader, with
evidence of
critique
when analysing
the meaning of the
student’s own leadership
practice.
There is clear evidence of
insightful application of
new knowledge and others’
perspectives in
understanding self as leader
and in relation to others,
with evidence of
in-depth
critical analysis into the
meaning of the student’s
own leadership practice.
There is clear evidence of
insightful and highly
developed
application of
new knowledge and
others’ perspectives in
understanding self as
leader and in relation to
others, with evidence of
exceptional and insightful
critical analysis into the
meaning of the student’s
own leadership practice.
30 marks 0 – 8 9 – 14 15 – 17 18 – 20 21 – 23 24 – 30
Criterion 4:
Appropriate
acknowledgement
of information
sources
ULO1 (GLO1)
Absence of important
conventions in relation
to Harvard referencing
including: in-text
citations and reference
list; and appropriate
presentation and use
of paraphrasing and
directly quoted
material.
Inconsistently uses
important conventions
in relation to Harvard
referencing including:
in-text citations and
reference list; and
appropriate
presentation and use
of paraphrasing and
directly quoted
material.
Mostly uses important
conventions in relation to
Harvard referencing
including: in-text citations
and reference list; and
appropriate presentation
and use of paraphrasing
and directly quoted
material.
Satisfactorily uses
important conventions in
relation to Harvard
referencing including: in
text citations and
reference list; and
appropriate presentation
and use of paraphrasing
and directly quoted
material.
Expertly and with minimal
error
uses important
conventions in relation to
Harvard referencing
including: in-text citations
and reference list; and
appropriate presentation
and use of paraphrasing
and directly quoted
material.
Expertly and without
error
uses important
conventions in relation to
Harvard referencing
including: in-text citations
and reference list; and
appropriate presentation
and use of paraphrasing
and directly quoted
material.
10 marks 0 – 2.5 3 – 4.5 5 – 5.5 6 – 6.5 7 – 7.5 8 – 10
Overall
100
N
0 or above
N
30 or above
P
50 or above
C
60 or above
D
70 or above
HD
80 or above