The political, social and economic history of the Further Education and Training College Sector and that of the communities it serves influences the operation of these institutions. The history of „state aided‟ and the „state‟ technical colleges has resulted in some Rectors and some Campus Managers having different ideas regarding leadership and management. Campus managers who bring with them the style of a state technical college‟s past tends to follow a very rigid and autocratic management, while those who come from the state aided technical college‟s past tends to emphasize teamwork, delegation but autocracy as well. Getting these campus managers to devolve power to other lecturers in the FET College is somewhat a challenging task. With this in mind, the purpose of this dissertation is to determine the enactment of „lecturer leadership‟ by the classroom lecturers at one FET College, and to investigate what hinders lecturers‟ enactment of leadership in this context. Where leadership is enacted, I intend establishing factors that promote the successful enactment. From a theoretical perspective, distributed leadership theory underpins this study. As I have had little choice but to use the literature on teacher leadership within a schooling context, because there is no literature around the concept of lecturer leadership in the context of the FET College both locally and internationally that I came across. I have taken the liberty of adopting a term „lecturer leadership‟ which is most suited for the FET context. My study is situated within an interpretive paradigm because I worked from the premise that there are multiple truths and I wanted to understand the different interpretations of the world through the lecturer leaders‟ lenses. I aligned myself with Cohen, Manion and Morrison who write “the central endeavour in the context of the interpretive paradigm is to understand the subjective world of human experiences” (2007, p.21). Using a descriptive case study methodology allowed me to track the three lecturer leaders for six month period in the FET College where I worked to get a nuanced description of how lecturer leadership was enacted. The lecturers‟ responses were collected both as numerical data, through survey questionnaires, and textual data, through a focus group and individual interviews, journaling process, and observations. / Thesis (M.Ed.)-University of KwaZulu-Natal, Pietermaritzburg, 2010.

This study describes the extent to which summative assessment tasks assess the different cognitive levels and learning outcomes with reference to the SAG (2008) for Grade 10 Life Sciences. Essentially, it describes the fit between the intended and implemented assessment, using documentary analysis as a research strategy. In order to determine the fit between intended and implemented assessment the Life Sciences SAG (2008) and question papers on summative assessment tasks were analysed. The question papers were obtained from three schools which were sampled purposively in the Mpumalaga Province. The Life Sciences SAG (2008) was analysed in order to determine the official percentage weightings (marks) of the cognitive levels and learning outcomes which must be assessed in the summative assessment tasks (intended assessment). Using the Revised Bloom’s Taxonomy as an analysis tool, question papers on summative assessment tasks were also analysed in order to determine the average percentage weightings (marks) of the cognitive levels and learning outcomes which were assessed (implemented assessment). When the intended and implemented assessments were compared the following results were obtained: For practical tasks and end-of-year examinations there was an incongruity between the intended and implemented assessment in terms of the cognitive levels and learning outcomes. The discrepancy between the intended and the implemented assessment was also found in controlled tests but only in terms of the learning outcomes. In controlled tests the fit between intended and implemented assessment in terms of the cognitive levels could not be determined because the SAG (2008) does not prescribe the cognitive levels which must be assessed. Furthermore, a weak fit between the intended and the implemented assessment in terms of the lower cognitive levels and learning outcomes was found in mid-year examinations. However, there was a strong fit between the intended and implemented assessment in terms of the higher cognitive levels in mid-year examinations. Lastly, for the research projects the fit between the intended and implemented assessment could not be determined because the Life Sciences SAG (2008) does not prescribe the cognitive levels as well as the percentage weightings of the learning outcomes which must be assessed.