The test will be two hours, plus 10 minutes reading time.
You will be asked to describe, analyse and validate your understanding of leadership in relation to two situations drawn from your own experience.
| Overview of test and Marking | ||
|---|---|---|
| Overview | Situation A | Situation B |
| Describe the situation | 10% | 10% |
| Identify & analyse the SO's leadership | 10% | 10% |
| Identify & analyse the team characteristics | 10% | 10% |
| Validation: Give reasons for your identification and analysis of leadership and team characteristics | 20% | 20% |
| 50% | 50% (100% total) | |
In line with the previous SOPP - PET this test allocates marks as itemised below:
| Points and Grade | |
|---|---|
| Points | Grade |
| 0-60 | F F is a fail, You answered poorly |
| 61-70 | C C is a competent pass |
| 71-90 | B B is a strong pass |
| 91-100 | A A is an excellent pass |
Describing an incident always involves highlighting certain parts and diminishing others. What you tell and what you leave out is your choice. If you have ever written a report, then you have experienced making these choices. The important thing is to bear in mind your purpose for writing - what is it about the incident that you are trying to highlight and draw attention to?
Be sure to say where you are in relation to the incident and what your part was. How many others were there? What leadership decisions did the SO take? What equipment did you have? What complications arose? Make the details as specific and concrete as possible. What was the mood like? Which details stand out for you? What caused you to select this incident?
Give concrete details in a chronological sequence. The reader should have a strong sense of the whole scene, the issues that arose, and the consequences (be careful to protect the identity of people and places).
Identify points relating to leadership style and team characteristics, such as communication, collaboration, motivation, conflict resolution and so on.
Having identified relevant points, now ask yourself "why?" For example, why did they make that decision? Were there any assumptions? Were they valid? Show depth of thought in relation to the issues under discussion. To analyse means to look behind the surface structure of your source material, in this case the description of your chosen situation.
Here you try to identify major themes as a result of your previous description and analysis; use examples to support your ideas and relate the points you are making to SO leadership.
Val Ingham, Lecturer Emergency Management, Charles Sturt University.