Benchmark Assignment – Human Resources and Change

Benchmark Assignment – Human Resources and Change

Assignment:
The major responsibilities of human resources management are attracting, developing, and maintaining a quality workforce.
**Review the RSPS (Rancho Solano) it’s located further down these instructions** case from Topics 1 and 2. Recall that the board of directors at RSPS has hired you as part of a consulting team to review the situation and present your findings and recommendations. Refresh your memory on the issues in the K-12 sector in general, as well as in the case of RSPS in particular, by reading the case study again. Your next task is to identify three subsystems that are in need of change in RSPS, as well as the people (human resources) you would “attract, develop, and maintain” in order to effectively implement change.
Based on the RSPS case, you will choose one subsystem to change and write a 1,250-1,500 word paper in which you address the following questions that pertain to the major human resource management responsibilities and to change management. Strengthen your recommendations by showing how your proposed changes are working in another successful organization. In your comparison, consider referring to successful private, charter, or public schools in Arizona. A list of recommended websites and articles is provided at the end of this document for use in conjunction with this assignment.
Address then following in your paper:
1. What one major organizational subsystem needs to be changed in RSPS? Justify your choice. How does it compare to any of the successful private, charter, or public schools in Arizona?
2. How will the subsystem change affect the two other subsystems within RSPS that you have identified and how will you realign the total system?
3. Identify and explain how you would ensure that the proposed change will satisfy any three stakeholders of RSPS?
4. How should RSPS attract, develop, and maintain the workforce required to bring about your proposed change?
a. Choose at least one of the following in your discussion about attracting a quality workforce to support the change: human resource planning, recruitment, or selection.
b. Choose at least one of the following in your discussion about developing a quality workforce to support the change: employee orientation, training and development, or performance appraisal.
c. Choose at least one of the following in your discussion about maintaining a quality workforce to support the change: career development, work-life balance, compensation and benefits, employee retention and turnover, or labor-management relations.
Integrate a faith-based or worldview-based component in the paper and make a clear connection on how it informs the groups’ management practices. (NOTE: Individuals all have a worldview, and that worldview influences their decisions, values, and perceptions. It also affects how they manage people, or think they should be managed. For this assignment, this requirement relates to your worldview, not of RSPS.
Include at least four academic references to support your position. One of them should directly relate to the company discussed in your paper.
Prepare this assignment according to the guidelines found in the APA Style Guide, located in the Student Success Center. An abstract is not required.
Please Include a conclusion
This assignment uses a rubric. Please review the rubric prior to beginning the assignment to become familiar with the expectations for successful completion.
.

Recommended Websites and Articles:
Lists of Private Schools in Arizona:
1. 14 Most Expensive Private Schools in Metro Phoenix. http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2014/09/17/arizona-phoenix-expensive-private-schools/15736007/
2. Best Private High Schools in Arizona.https://k12.niche.com/rankings/private-high-schools/best-overall/s/arizona/
Lists of Charter and Public Schools in Arizona:
1. Best High Schools in Arizona. http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/arizona
2. Phoenix School. http://www.greatschools.org/arizona/phoenix/
3. Top 10 Arizona companies: Private schools. http://www.azcentral.com/story/money/business/2014/06/28/top-10-arizona-companies-private-schools/11366935/
Articles: Subsystems/Schools as Subsystems:
1. “What Are Organizational Subsystems?” by Kokemuller.http://smallbusiness.chron.com/organizational-subsystems-41735.html
2. “Social Organization and Schools: A General Systems Theory Perspective,” by Bowen. http://www.uncssp.org/publications/Bowen%20social%20Organizations%20and%20Schools%202006.pdf
3. “Educational Systems and Development and Its Relationship to ISD,” by Reigeluth. Chapter 6 in Instructional Technology: Past Present and Future (2nd ed., 1995), by Anglin (Ed.). http://www.indiana.edu/~syschang/decatur/reigeluth_pubs/documents/74_esd_relation_to_isd.pdf

**Review the RSPS (Rancho Solano) case**
Rancho Solano Case Study
Professor Moronke Oke, Ph.D prepared this case. This case study was developed solely as the basis for class discussion and is not intended to serve as an endorsement, source of primary data, or illustration of effective or ineffective management.
Rancho Solano Private School (RSPS) was founded in 1954 by the Bayer and Freesmeyer families. Over the years, the reputation of the school was established as a leading academic institution with an advanced curriculum. Parents describe the school as having a highly performing academic environment with a rigorous curriculum, but also as having a safe and family-oriented atmosphere in a place where community was valued. Not surprisingly, the student population grew and the school opened multiple campuses around the valley (Gilbert, Union Hills, Greenway [Scottsdale,] Missouri [Phoenix,] and Hillcrest [Peoria]).The Freesmeyer family eventually sold RSPS to the for-profit Illinois-based Meritas Family of Schools in 2007. The mission of the Meritas group was to broaden the international focus of Rancho Solano, along with the nine other schools it owned (across the United States, Switzerland, and Mexico). Even under the new ownership, the environment in the various RSPS campuses was still described as achievement oriented and supportive.
Milestones
• 1954 Rancho Solano Private School founded by the Bayer and Freesmeyer families
• 1954 Inaugural opening at Missouri Campus
• 1979 Union Hills Campus established
• 1991 Greenway Campus established
• 2003 Gilbert Campus created
• 2007 Rancho Solano Private Schools joins the Meritas International Family of Schools
• 2008 Union Hills Campus relocated to Hillcrest Campus
• 2008 The inaugural freshman class joins Rancho Solano Preparatory High School
• 2010 Rancho Solano Preparatory High School is designated an authorized International Baccalaureate (IB) Programme School
• 2012 Rancho Solano Preparatory High School graduates first class in May
• 2012 Rancho Solano’s new 6th-12th grade Middle & Upper School Campus opens in August
• 2013 Opening of Upper School Athletic Complex & Student Center (Ranch Solano Preparatory School, 2014)

Within one year of Meritas owning the school, parents noticed a subtle name change. The school, which was previously known as “Rancho Solano Private School,” was now “Rancho Solano Preparatory School.” This name change, in itself did not seem to affect the school’s image nor functioning at an operational level, however, it was an early indication of the strategic direction the school would head within the next few years. In 2008, RSPS attempted to enter into the high school business at its Union Hills campus, but that initial attempt was not as successful, as would have been anticipated. This was probably a contributory factor to the relocation of the high school to a new state-of-the-art campus in Scottsdale known as the Ventura campus. A high point for RSPS came in 2010 when it launched its international Baccalaureate program (IB program), closely followed by its first graduating class in May of 2012. However, that same year, 2012, was when RSPS decided to close both the Union Hills campus and the Missouri campus. At the time of the Missouri closure, families were informed that low enrollment was the reason behind the closure and that all other campuses (Hillcrest, Gilbert, Greenway and Ventura) would remain open. However, that period was relative tumultuous in the United States. The economic recession in the country between 2005 and 2011 led to many organizations going out of business, and the education sector was not exempt (U.S. Department of Labor, 2013).
*******************
In addition to the economic recession, private schools in Arizona have faced intense competition from Charter schools (charter schools are independently run public schools). Between 2011 and 2013, two top-rated charter schools opened campuses within five miles of RSPS Hillcrest in Peoria. Basis Schools, which has been consistently ranked in the top 10 high schools in United States (Hansen, 2011), opened its Peoria campus in 2011 while Glendale Preparatory Academy (one of the Great Heart Schools) opened a 75,000 square foot location in Peoria in 2013 (Youwestvalley.com, 2012). Subsequently, some RSPS (Hillcrest campus) students transferred over to those schools. In 2013, an e-mail was sent out to parents in error, informing them that the Hillcrest campus middle school would be discontinued. That e-mail was withdrawn on the same day, and shortly afterwards, the head of the school retired. A new head of school, Dr. Audrey Mernard, was appointed by Meritas in 2013. Dr. Mernard, a well-educated and experienced administrator, worked with “strategic planning experts” to create a niche and a new mission for the school. The school was set on a path to pursue an intentionally international focus (Stanton, 2014). Strategically, RSPS was headed in a new direction. Mernard was quoted as stating “We have to change the way we teach as the world becomes more interconnected,” and that “this will pave the way for accelerated investment that continues to build a school recognized for a rigorous, personalized approach to learning … as well as state-of-the-art facilities and technology” (Creno, 2014). Dr. Mernard embraced her new role and continuously assured parents that the Hillcrest campus (pre-K through middle school) would remain open. Parents who attended the PTSA in mid-December 2013 affirmed that she offered assurances at the meeting.
January 2014
Winter break started on December 23, 2013 and students were scheduled to return to school on January 7, 2014. The resumption date struck some parents as odd because January 7 was a Tuesday rather than a Monday. The reason soon became evident. Early on Monday morning (January 6), the principal of the Hillcrest campus received information that the Hillcrest campus was closing down at the end of the semester. This news had to be conveyed to faculty and staff at the school. Within a few hours, Creno (2014) reported that “parents of 170 students at Rancho Solano Gilbert and 260 at Rancho Solano Hillcrest received letters stating the company would close the two schools to ‘align our resources to the changing market dynamics.’” Only two campuses would remain open: the Greenway campus and the high school in Ventura (both campuses are located in Scottsdale). The letter stated “we’ve made the decision to move all Early Learning and Lower School education to Greenway and all Middle School and High School education to Ventura” (Rancho Solano 2014-2015, 2014). Parents were outraged, students were in disarray, and faculty and administration were in shock. The dilemma was that parents and faculty were left scrambling to find jobs and schools for the 2014-2015 academic year. The timing of the announcement, according to a parent, “showed poor judgment on behalf of RSPS” Benson (2014). This was because most schools had already completed their hiring for staff and faculty; likewise, open admissions for students who would have registered at the surrounding schools had closed in December (a few weeks prior to the announcement). If parents were informed earlier, it would have been possible for them to try to secure a spot for their children at one of the schools nearby. They attempted to place their children on waiting lists, but most lists had already filled up. Some surrounding schools had a waiting list in excess of 800 students.
Trend in the State of Arizona and USA
As it turns out, RSPS was not the only school closing campuses down. That period was a difficult time for schools in Arizona in general; with the Center for Education Reform (2011) reporting that 22 charter schools in Arizona closed down between 2010 and 2011. The data showed that the major reasons those schools closed down included financial, mismanagement, and academic issues. But it was not only Charter schools that were shutting down. In 2012, Huicochea reported that Tucson Unified School District was closing down 11 schools due to financial reasons. This trend continued into 2013, when the news Channel ABC15 reported the closure of 11 public schools in December in the West Valley of Phoenix. In the 2014-2015 academic year, yet another school, Hillcrest academy closed its doors on its Phoenix campus to K-4th grade students in September 2014. Shortly thereafter, parents of its 5th -12th grade students received a letter in January of 2015 informing them that the campus would be closing down in 2 days. The closure was attributed to low student enrolment and financial reasons. Students who wished to continue were offered a bus ride to their Mesa campus. The trend in school closure has continued even into 2015, with Dale (2015) reporting the possible closure of three charter schools which all received F grades on their state report cards in 2014. Anne Ryman, in a news article, stated, “Nationally, the percentage of school districts closing schools doubled from 3 percent in the 2008-09 school year to 6 percent in 2009-10, … Eight percent of districts closed schools for this school year [2010/2011]; 15 percent anticipate closing schools in 2011-12”(2011, para. 15). Private schools were also affected. Creno (2014) reports that during 2009-2014, enrollment in private schools in Arizona declined by about 9 percent. Recently, Faller (2015) reported that Tesseract school, one of the private schools in Arizona, was in danger of being closed due to a deficit of more than 3 million dollars.
National and Local Trends:
The National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) in a May 2012 publication titled The Condition of Education, shows the projected trend of registration in public schools through 2023/24 as well as the trend in charter and private school from the 1990s through 2011-12. (National Center for Education Statistics, 2012) Their data is presented below:

Public Schools: NCES Projections
Overall, the NCES projects an increase of 5% across the United States in public school enrollment from 2011–12 through 2023–24 academic years. The state of Arizona is projected to be one of the 45 states that will experience the largest increase (a 23% estimate). Arizona is also projected to be the state with the second highest projection in numbers of preK-8th grade enrollment in public school with a projected enrollment of 20% (National Center for Education Statistics, 2015).

________________________________________

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data CCD),”State Nonfiscal Survey of Public Elementary/Secondary Education,” 2011–12; and Public State Elementary and Secondary Enrollment Model: 1980–2012. See Digest of Education Statistics 2013, table 203.20.

Figure 1. Projected percentage change in public school enrollment in grades prekindergarten (pre-K) through 12, by state or jurisdiction: Between school years 2011–12 and 2023–24

________________________________________
Charter Schools:
According the NCES, from school year 1999–2000 to 2011–12, the number of students enrolled in public charter schools increased from 0.3 million to 2.1 million students. During this period, the percentage of public school students who attended charter schools increased from 0.7 to 4.2 percent” (National Center for Educational Statistics, 2012). In the 2009/10 academic year, only the District of Columbia and Arizona had the highest number of students registered in charter schools (10% or more). Similarly, the total number of charter schools increased from 1.7% in 1999/200 to 5.8% in 2011–12, (that is from 1,500 to 5,700 schools). NCES reports that in school year 2012-2013, “After the District of Columbia, Arizona had the second highest percentage (14 percent) of charter school enrollment as a percent of total public school enrollment” (2015, para. 5).
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey,” selected school years, 1999–2000 through 2012–13. See Digest of Education Statistics 2014, tables 216.20 and 216.30..
Figure 2. Number of public charter schools, by school level: Selected school years, 1999–2000 through 2012–13
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD), “Public Elementary/Secondary School Universe Survey,” 2012–13. See Digest of Education Statistics 2014, table 216.90.
Figure 3. Percentage of all public school students enrolled in public charter schools, by state: School year 2012–13

Private Schools:
In 2009/10 academic year, 10% of elementary and secondary school students were in private schools. This number however represents a drop of about 800,000 students relative to the 2009/10 academic year. The NCES (2014) reports that “the percentage of all students in private schools decreased from 12 percent in 1995–96 to 10 percent in 2011–12.”

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Private School Universe Survey (PSS), 1995–96 through 2011–12. See Digest of Education Statistics 2013, table 205.20.

Figure 4. Private school enrollment in preK through grade 12, by grade level: School years 1995–96 through 2011–12
Corresponding to the decline in private school enrollments, the number of private schools in the nation has also seen a steady decline between 1995/96 through 2011/12.
SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Private School Universe Survey (PSS), various years, 1995–96 through 2011–12. See Digest of Education Statistics 2013, table 205.20.

Figure 5. Number of private school students in preK through grade 12, by school type: Selected years, 1995–96 through 2011–12
***********************
Back to RSPS: Parent Meeting: January 8, 2014
Parents were invited to a meeting on January 8, 2014 to meet with the head of the school and a Meritas official. Parents invited the media to the meeting, but the media was denied access. At the onset of the meeting, Dr. Mernard took the podium and began by praising the Hillcrest campus and its community. These statements bothered some of the parents, who demanded to know why the school was closing if it had all these great attributes. The environment was heated, and, at one point, Dr. Mernard stated that she would walk out if parents did not take turns asking questions. This further irritated some parents, many of whom were highly educated and professionals in their fields. They took offense to what they interpreted to be a very condescending tone. The situation seemed to intensify. Parents felt betrayed because of the timing of the closure announcement, particularly the loyal families who were planning on their children continuing their education with the school on the affected campus. When presented with this, Dr. Mernard stated that buses would be provided to shuttle children (ages 2-12 years old) to the new locations. Parents noted that the closest campus would require at least a 40-mile trip on a school bus twice every day. It was evident that this would not be a viable option for most parents. Many parents felt that the announcement timing left them no option but to send their children to the Scottsdale campuses. Some parents tried to reason with the administration, others asked if the closure was due to financial reasons, but Dr. Mernard replied that the finances were not a factor, and the closure was for “demographic reasons.” Other parents tried to negotiate more compassionate terms, asking the administration to run the school for one more academic year so families would have enough time to transition their children. RSPS administrators did not agree. Some parents offered to pay more in terms of tuition, but administration again did not agree, and no resolution was reached. While Dr. Mernard stated that the reason for the closure of the two campuses was not financial in nature, Moody’s analytics reported that the parent company (Meritas Family of schools) was experiencing some strain (it should be noted that the ratings of Moody’s analytics is a representation of the analysts’ opinion of the creditworthiness of an organization). A quick Internet search revealed that in August of 2012, a Moody’s report affirmed Meritas’s B2 CFR and stated that the ratings outlook changed from stable to negative (Moody’s, 2012). About 10 months later (in June 2013), “Moody’s downgraded Meritas’s CFR to B3” (Moody’s, 2013). Then in 2014, Meritas’s rating was further downgraded to Caa2 (Moody’s, 2014).
Following the parent meeting in January, some families pulled their children out of RSPS immediately, even prior to the completion of the academic year (with no financial reimbursement as parents had signed a contract for the academic year). Others families decided to complete the academic year and withdraw from the school afterwards. By the end of the year, student population had dwindled on the affected campuses. Of the students who remained at RSPS Hillcrest, some planned to transfer to surrounding schools, few decided to continue at the RSPS Greenway and Ventura campuses, while others registered at a new nonprofit private school, the Bayer school.
The Bayer School was opened by some parents who were previously affiliated with RSPS Hillcrest. A new principal, Kelly Lovelady, was appointed, but to Lovelady, this was not just a job. Lovelady is the daughter of Rancho Solano’s original founders. A quote from the Bayer school website reads:
Bayer Private School was founded by a core group of parents and professionals seeking a school with high standards of education, a strong sense of values, and a commitment to community. The core parent group, in conjunction with the Freesmeyer and Lovelady families, established Bayer Private School, the school they all envisioned in the northwest valley. (Bayer, 2015b)
Vanek (2015) reports that Lovelady came out of retirement to take up this position, and, in an interview with Creno (2014), Lovelady declared “…the point is saving our legacy.” In addition to her role as principal of the school, Scott (2015) stated that Lovelady is also the president of the nonprofit corporation that owns the school.
Moving forward
Following the closure of the Hillcrest campus, Creno (2014) reported that The Bayer School hired 12 teachers/staff from RSPS Hillcrest who were described as “invested, passionate, and innovative” (Bayer, 2015a). The Bayer school began with an enrollment of about 100 students (preschool through eighth-grade) rising to 120 students by the end of the year. Most of the initial 100 students, according to Lovelady, were from the Hillcrest campus of RSPS. The school leased a church for its first year. Parents describe Bayer as a “happy place,” and Lovelady is also quoted as saying that “the school’s first year [was] a success, with about 90 percent of students re-enrolling for [the] next school year, and some classes already reaching capacity” (Vanek, 2015).
K-8 tuition to Bayer is estimated to be about $12,000 a year compared to RSPS’s basic annual tuition (which ranges from $14,800 for elementary-school students to $18,875 for high school). Tesseract’s tuition ranges from $13,750 for Pre-K to $20,500 for high school (Tesseract, 2015) and Phoenix Country Day School ranges from $19,300 for Pre-K to 24,200 for high school (Phoenix Country, 2015). Estimates for the build-out of The Bayer School permanent site range from $4m (Scott, 2015) to $5M (Creno, 2014). The fall, 2015 start at Bayer is estimated to have about 190 children (pre-K through eighth grade) and Lovelady stated that Bayer hopes to have about 440 students at build-out (Scott, 2015).
References
ABC15. (2013, December 10). Arizona schools forced to close due to poor, failing results. Retrieved from http://www.abc15.com/news/region-west-valley/glendale/arizona-charter-schools-forced-to-close-due-to-poor-failing-test-scores
Bayer Private School (2015a). Academics. Retrieved from http://www.bayerschool.com/academics/
Bayer Private School (2015b). History. Retrieved from http://www.bayerschool.com/history/
Benson, P. (2014). Rancho Solano to close 2 valley campuses. Retrieved from http://www.kpho.com/story/24400084/rancho-solano-to-close-2-valley-campuses
Center for Education Reform. (2011). Appendix D. Closed charter schools by state. Retrieved from https://www.edreform.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/CER_FINALClosedSchools2011-1.pdf
Creno, C. (2014). Rancho Solano closing Gilbert, Peoria campuses. Retrieved from http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/gilbert/2014/05/02/rancho-solano-close-gilbert-peoria-schools/8611833/
Dale, M. (2015). Three Tucson charter schools faced with closure. Retrieved from http://tucson.com/news/local/three-tucson-charter-schools-faced-with-closure/article_6dbcb20e-3acc-577c-8ebf-1468eab1fb63.html
Faller, M. B. (2015). $1 million budget shortfall threatens to close Tesseract School. Retrieved fromhttp://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2015/05/14/million-budget-shortfall-threatens-close-tesseract-school/27286365/
Hansen, K. (2011). Basis opens $6.7 million charter school in north Peoria. Retrieved from
http://www.azcentral.com/community/peoria/articles/20110809peoria-basis-charter-school-opens.html
Huicochea, A. (2012, December 21). Tucson closes 11 schools in 2012.Arizona Daily Star. Retrieved from http://m.tucson.com/news/local/tusd-to-close-schools-to-chip-away-at-million-shortfall/article_92b790de-99a9-55af-a066-7c18fbaf2b29.html?mobile_touch=true
Moody’s Investor Service. (2012). Moody’s affirms Meritas’ B2 CFR; changes outlook to negative. Retrieved from https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-affirms-Meritas-B2-CFR-changes-outlook-to-negative–PR_253326
Moody’s Investor Service. (2013). Moody’s downgrades Meritas’ CFR to B3; rates new financing. Retrieved from https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-downgrades-Meritas-CFR-to-B3-rates-new-financing–PR_274184
Moody’s Investor Service. (2014). Moody’s rates Meritas’ 2nd lien term loan Caa2, affirms B3 CFR; outlook stable. Retrieved from https://www.moodys.com/research/Moodys-rates-Meritas-2nd-lien-term-loan-Caa2-affirms-B3–PR_302960
National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The condition of education. Retrieved from http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2012/2012045_2.pdf
National Center for Education Statistics. (2014). Private school enrollment. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgc.asp
National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). Public school enrollment. Retrieved from https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cgb.asp
Phoenix Country Day School. (2015). PCDS Tuition. Retrieved from http://www.pcds.org/admissions/affording-pcds/pcds-tuition
Rancho Solano 2014-2015 campus changes announced. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.kpho.com/link/676198/letter-rancho-solano-to-close-2-campuses
Rancho Solano Preparatory School. (2014). History. Retrieved from http://www.ranchosolano.com/school/about/history
Ryman, A. (2011, April 17). As enrollments drop across Arizona, schools disappear. Retrieved from http://archive.azcentral.com/news/articles/arizona-schools-close-low-enrollment.html
Scott, L. (2015). $4M Bayer School coming to North PHX. Retrieved from http://azbex.com/4m-bayer-school-coming-to-north-phx/
Stanton, A. (2014). Dr. Audrey C. Menard: Keeping command of campus: Prep school headmaster runs school like a business. Retrieved from http://inbusinessmag.com/in-business/dr-audrey-c-menard-keeping-command-campus#.VVUw5Xjn-M8
Tesseract School. (2015). Tuition information. Retrieved from http://tesseractschool.org/admissions/tuition-information/
U.S. Department of Labor (2013) Travel expenditures during the recent recession, 2005–2011. Retrieved from http://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2013/ted_20130115.htm
Vanek, C. (2015). Bayer Private School breaks ground in Peoria. Retrieved from http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/peoria/2015/04/22/bayer-private-school-breaks-ground-peoria/26182391/
Yourwestvalley.com. (2012). Glendale Prep readies new campus, offers enrollment. (2013). Retrieved from http://www.yourwestvalley.com/schools/article_3ff0cf6a-3577-11e2-b1b4-001a4bcf887a.html

Other Useful/Recommended Sites
Best Schools In Arizona:
https://www.azreportcards.org/
https://k12.niche.com/rankings/private-high-schools/best-overall/s/arizona/
http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/arizona

Private Schools in Arizona:
http://www.azcentral.com/story/news/local/phoenix/2014/09/17/arizona-phoenix-expensive-private-schools/15736007/
http://www.privateschoolreview.com/county_private_schools/stateid/AZ/county/4013/elementary

Rubric
Benchmark Assignment – Human Resources and Change
1
Unsatisfactory
0.00% 2
Less than Satisfactory
65.00% 3
Satisfactory
75.00% 4
Good
85.00% 5
Excellent
100.00%
65.0 %Content
5.0 %Organizational Subsystems in Need of Change within RSPS Identification of a major organizational subsystem in need of change in RSPS is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Identification of a major organizational subsystem in need of change in RSPS is vague or incomplete. Justification of the selected subsystem is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. Identification of a major organizational subsystem in RSPS in need of change is provided, but at a cursory level. Justification of choice is rudimentary and may contain some inconsistencies. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. Identification of a major organizational subsystem in need of change is comprehensive and detailed. Justification for the need of change is clear and well-integrated. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. Identification of a major organizational subsystem in need of change is comprehensive and detailed. A thorough description of that subsystem is provided and supported with relevant examples or personal insight are to further understanding. Justification for the need of change is clear and well-integrated. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
10.0 %Comparison of Subsystem to Change With Successful Subsystems (Programmatic Competency 3.1) Proposal for changes to the subsystem identified as most in need of change as well as a justification through comparison with subsystems in successful schools is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Proposal for changes to the subsystem identified as most in need of change is vague or incomplete. Justification through comparison with subsystems in successful schools is weak or marginal with gaps in presentation. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. Proposal for changes to the subsystem identified as most in need of change is provided, but at a cursory level. Rudimentary justification through comparison with subsystems in successful schools may contain some inconsistencies. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. Proposal for changes to the subsystem identified as most in need of change is clear and well-integrated with justification through comparison with subsystems in successful schools. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. Proposal for changes to the subsystem identified as most in need of change is thorough and well-integrated with justification through comparison with subsystems in successful schools. Examples and personal insight are used to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
10.0 %Impact of the Proposed Change on Organizational Subsystems (Programmatic Competency 3.2) Examination of the impact of the proposed change on the two other identified subsystems as well as a proposal for relevant realignment of the total organization to facilitate the change is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Examination of the impact of the proposed change on the two other identified subsystems as well as a proposal for relevant realignment of the total organization to facilitate the change is vague or incomplete. Examination of the impact of the proposed change on the two other identified subsystems as well as a proposal for relevant realignment of the total organization to facilitate the change is provided, but at a cursory level. Examination of the impact of the proposed change on the two other identified subsystems as well as a proposal for relevant realignment of the total organization to facilitate the change is clear and well-integrated. Examination of the impact of the proposed change on the two other identified subsystems as well as a proposal for relevant realignment of the total organization to facilitate the change is thorough and well integrated.
10.0 %Satisfaction of three stakeholders Explanation of how to ensure satisfaction of any three RSPS stakeholders is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Explanation of how to ensure satisfaction among three of the RSPS stakeholders is incomplete or irrelevant. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. Rudimentary explanation of how to ensure satisfaction among three of the stakeholders may contain some inconsistencies. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. A clear explanation of how to ensure satisfaction of three RSPS stakeholders is provided. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. A clear explanation of how to ensure satisfaction of three RSPS stakeholders is provided. Examples and personal insight are used to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
5.0 %Attracting, Human Resources Proposal for how RSPS should attract the human resources required to bring about the change is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Discussion of the specifics as instructed in the assignment is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Proposal for how RSPS should attract the human resources required to bring about the change is vague or incomplete. Discussion of the specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment is vague or incomplete. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. Proposal for how RSPS should attract the human resources required to bring about the change, including discussion of specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment, is provided, but at a cursory level. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. Proposal for how RSPS should attract the human resources required to bring about the change, including discussion of specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment, is clearly articulated and well-integrated. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. Proposal for how RSPS should attract the human resources required to bring about the change, including discussion of specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment, is thorough and well-integrated. Examples and personal insight are used to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
5.0 %Developing, Human Resources Proposal for how RSPS should develop the human resources required to bring about the change is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Discussion of the specifics as instructed in the assignment is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Proposal for how RSPS should develop the human resources required to bring about the change is vague or incomplete. Discussion of the specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment is vague or incomplete. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. Proposal for how RSPS should develop the human resources required to bring about the change, including discussion of specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment, is provided, but at a cursory level. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. Proposal for how RSPS should develop the human resources required to bring about the change, including discussion of specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment, is clearly articulated and well-integrated. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. Proposal for how RSPS should develop the human resources required to bring about the change, including discussion of specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment, is thorough and well-integrated. Examples and personal insight are used to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
5.0 %Maintaining Human Resources Proposal for how RSPS should maintain the human resources required to bring about the change is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Discussion of the specifics as instructed in the assignment is absent, inappropriate, or irrelevant. Proposal for how RSPS should maintain the human resources required to bring about the change is vague or incomplete. Discussion of the specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment is vague or incomplete. Supporting material is often confusing or inappropriate. Proposal for how RSPS should maintain the human resources required to bring about the change, including discussion of specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment, is provided, but at a cursory level. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. Proposal for how RSPS should maintain the human resources required to bring about the change, including discussion of specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment, is clearly articulated and well-integrated. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. Proposal for how RSPS should maintain the human resources required to bring about the change, including discussion of specifics of this effort as instructed in the assignment, is thorough and well-integrated. Examples and personal insight are used to further understanding. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
5.0 %Internal consistency between the proposed functions of attracting developing and marinating a quality workforce that would bring about the change The student fails to select relevant HR process to attract develop and maintain the quality workforce. Choices are made from the relevant categories to attract develop and maintain the quality workforce but lack connectivity, are vague, incomplete, confusing or inappropriate. Selected processes would not bring about the changes proffered. Choices are from the relevant categories to attract develop and maintain the quality workforce but are rudimentary and incapable of bringing about optimal results. There is a minimal lack of alignment among HR practices selected, with some inconsistencies in the argument. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. The selected HR processes to attract develop and maintain the quality workforce to bring about the proposed change are connected, internally consistent and are suitable to achieve the overall changes suggested. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. The selected HR processes to attract develop and maintain the quality workforce to bring about the proposed change are the optimal choices, connected, internally consistent and are applicable to the overall changes suggested. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity
5.0 %Connectivity to course No attempt is made to go beyond the topics of HRM and change management. No other course material is integrated. The student fails to develop or demonstrate a holistic understanding of subject area or discipline. A weak attempt is made to go beyond the topics of HRM and change management. The student is unable to clearly articulate develop or demonstrate a holistic understanding of the connectivity between the studied topics, the attempt is vague, incomplete, confusing or inappropriate. The student attempts to link at least one relevant topic in demonstrating a holistic understanding of the subject area and discipline, however, it is at a cursory level. The explanation is rudimentary and may contain some inconsistencies. Supporting material is of baseline acceptable quality and quantity. At least two broader topics are clearly and appropriately integrated into the argument to develop or demonstrate a holistic understanding of subject area and discipline. A clear explanation of the relevance of the chosen topics is presented. Supporting material is of above average quality and quantity. At least three appropriate topics from the broader course material are clearly, thoroughly and seamlessly integrated into the argument to develop a persuasive argument and demonstrate a holistic understanding of subject. Supporting material is of exceptional quality and quantity.
5.0 %Research Sources (relevancy, quantity, and type specifications) Sources are not used or cited as required in the assignment instructions. Noncredible sources are used. Source relevance is vague or inconsistent. References from appropriate sources are not included: at least four academic resources. Source relevance is mostly applicable and appropriate. References from appropriate sources are included: at least four academic resources. Source relevance is applicable and appropriate in all instances. References from appropriate sources are included: at least four academic resources. Source relevance is applicable and appropriate in all instances and sparks interest in the reader to pursue further investigation. References from appropriate sources are used: more than four academic resources.
5.0 %Integration of Faith, Learning, and Work
5.0 %CWV 4: Examines the Application of a personal Christian Worldview Within the Context of Discipline and Vocation The assignment does not articulate an application of the Christian perspective as it relates to discipline and vocation. The assignment articulates a basic understanding of the connection among the Christian perspective, discipline, and vocation. The assignment expresses a limited application of the Christian worldview to discipline and vocation. The assignment examines the application of the Christian worldview within the context of discipline and vocation in ways that contribute to the common good. The assignment interprets implications of applying a Christian perspective within a discipline and vocation.
20.0 %Organization and Effectiveness
7.0 %Thesis Development and Purpose Paper lacks any discernible overall purpose or organizing claim. Thesis and/or main claim are insufficiently developed and/or vague; purpose is not clear. Thesis and/or main claim are apparent and appropriate to purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are clear and forecast the development of the paper. It is descriptive and reflective of the arguments and appropriate to the purpose. Thesis and/or main claim are comprehensive. The essence of the paper is contained within the thesis. Thesis statement makes the purpose of the paper clear.
8.0 %Argument Logic and Construction Statement of purpose is not justified by the conclusion. The conclusion does not support the claim made. Argument is incoherent and uses noncredible sources. Sufficient justification of claims is lacking. Argument lacks consistent unity. There are obvious flaws in the logic. Some sources have questionable credibility. Argument is orderly, but may have a few inconsistencies. The argument presents minimal justification of claims. Argument logically, but not thoroughly, supports the purpose. Sources used are credible. Introduction and conclusion bracket the thesis. Argument shows logical progression. Techniques of argumentation are evident. There is a smooth progression of claims from introduction to conclusion. Most sources are authoritative. Clear and convincing argument presents a persuasive claim in a distinctive and compelling manner. All sources are authoritative.
5.0 %Mechanics of Writing (includes spelling, punctuation, grammar, language use) Surface errors are pervasive enough that they impede communication of meaning. Inappropriate word choice and/or sentence construction are used. Frequent and repetitive mechanical errors distract the reader. Inconsistencies in language choice (register) and/or word choice are present. Sentence structure is correct but not varied. Some mechanical errors or typos are present, but are not overly distracting to the reader. Correct and varied sentence structure and audience-appropriate language are employed. Prose is largely free of mechanical errors, although a few may be present. The writer uses a variety of effective sentence structures and figures of speech. Writer is clearly in command of standard, written, academic English.
10.0 %Format
5.0 %Paper Format (use of appropriate style for the major and assignment) Template is not used appropriately, or documentation format is rarely followed correctly. Appropriate template is used, but some elements are missing or mistaken. A lack of control with formatting is apparent. Appropriate template is used. Formatting is correct, although some minor errors may be present. Appropriate template is fully used. There are virtually no errors in formatting style. All format elements are correct.
5.0 %Documentation of Sources (citations, footnotes, references, bibliography, etc., as appropriate to assignment and style) Sources are not documented. Documentation of sources is inconsistent or incorrect, as appropriate to assignment and style, with numerous formatting errors. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, although some formatting errors may be present. Sources are documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is mostly correct. Sources are completely and correctly documented, as appropriate to assignment and style, and format is free of error.
100 %Total Weightage

TAKE ADVANTAGE OF OUR PROMOTIONAL DISCOUNT DISPLAYED ON THE WEBSITE AND GET A DISCOUNT FOR YOUR PAPER NOW!