| Course | HLTH 6433 Foundational Leadership in Health Education |
|---|---|
| Module | Module 5 |
| Paper type | Change leadership paper |
| Length | 1,270 words, about 5 pages plus title and reference pages |
| Format | APA 7 student paper |
| School | American College of Education |
| Program | Ed.S. in Public Health Education |
| Updated | September 2026 |
Free sample paper for HLTH 6433 Module 5
From Approval to Everyday Routine: Leading Change and Collaboration as Two Schools and a Health Partner Learn to Run Clinics Together
Student Name
American College of Education
HLTH6433: Foundational Leadership in Health Education
Module 5 Assignment
Instructor Name
May 18, 2026
Introduction
By the end of Module 4, the school board had approved school-based health centers at the south side middle school and the north side high school, with a community health center as the operating partner and a legal framework for records, consent and confidentiality. Approval is not change. Principals must give up rooms, teachers must adjust to students leaving class for appointments, school nurses must work alongside a new clinical team and the partner must adapt to bells, schedules and school culture. This paper describes how the coordinator will lead that change: assessing readiness, sequencing the work, building collaboration among organizations and responding to resistance.
Assessing Readiness
Weiner (2009) splits organizational readiness into two parts: change commitment, the resolve people share to carry a change through, and change efficacy, their joint confidence that they can. Commitment rises when people see value in the change; efficacy rests on how people size up the work involved, the resources at hand and the circumstances. The two schools differ. At the middle school, commitment is high because the principal requested the center and nurses see daily need, but efficacy is lower because the building is crowded and staff have never worked with an outside clinic. At the high school, efficacy is higher because a former vocational wing offers space, but commitment is mixed because some teachers see the center as a distraction. A single change plan for both schools would therefore be wrong: the middle school needs capability, and the high school needs conviction.
Sequencing the Change
Kotter (1996) laid out eight stages: create urgency; assemble a coalition with enough influence to guide the work; form a vision and strategy; communicate the vision; clear away obstacles so others can act; produce early wins; build on those wins; and root the new ways of working in the culture. Critics note that real change rarely moves in a clean sequence, and the coordinator will use the stages as a checklist rather than a script. Some stages are already under way. The data presented to the board in Module 2 built urgency, and the steering group formed in Module 3 is the guiding coalition. The remaining stages frame the launch year.
Vision and Communication
The vision, developed with the steering group, is simple: students get care at school so they can stay in school. The coordinator will communicate it through channels each group uses: a five-minute segment at each school's staff meeting, a letter home in English and Spanish, a short video featuring the school nurse and the nurse practitioner together and a page on the district website. Messages will be repeated over months, since a single announcement is quickly forgotten, and will be tailored: teachers hear about fewer disruptions and faster returns to class; parents hear about convenience and consent.
Empowering Action and Removing Obstacles
Obstacles identified by staff will be addressed directly. At the middle school, the principal and coordinator will convert two storage rooms, with the district's facilities budget covering plumbing for a sink. Nurses and center staff will jointly design the referral pass so that teachers see one familiar form rather than two. The partner will adjust its scheduling system to school periods so that appointments begin and end with bells. Teachers will be able to request that a student's appointment avoid a test period. Each of these changes gives people who must do the work some control over how it is done, which builds change efficacy.
Short-Term Wins
Early, visible successes will sustain commitment. The coordinator will plan three: a back-to-school sports physical day at the high school in the first month, which serves many students quickly and shows teachers the center's value; a flu vaccination day at both schools in October; and a report to staff after the first semester showing visits, students returned to class and nurse dismissals avoided. Stories matter as much as numbers, so the coordinator will ask the nurses, with families' permission and no identifying details, to share one example each month of a problem solved in the building.
Building Collaboration
The centers sit within a wider effort to support students' health and learning. The CDC and ASCD framework known by the initials WSCC puts the student in the middle of ten linked components, among them health services, counseling and psychological services, family engagement and community involvement, and asks those components to work together (Lewallen et al., 2015). Using that model, the coordinator will link the centers to the district's school health advisory council, connect center counselors with school counselors through a shared referral protocol and invite families into the steering group. The partnership with the health center will be governed by a memorandum of understanding that names shared goals, roles, data sharing, space and dispute resolution, and a joint operations team will meet monthly.
Responding to Resistance
Some resistance is certain and some is useful. Teachers who object to students leaving class are raising a legitimate concern, and the response is to measure time out of class and share it. A small group of parents may oppose the centers on principle, and the response is respect: participation is voluntary, and their children lose nothing by opting out. If a pediatric practice complains about lost patients, the referral agreement provides a process for review. The coordinator will distinguish resistance that points to a flaw in the plan, which should change the plan, from resistance rooted in values, which should be heard and respected but need not stop the work.
Tracking the Change
The coordinator will track the change itself, not only the centers' clinical output. Readiness will be reassessed at both schools after the first semester with a short staff survey asking how much staff value the centers and how confident they are that the arrangement works, mirroring the two components of readiness. Operational measures will include the average time from referral to visit, the share of students returned to class after a visit, minutes of instruction missed per visit and the number of teacher complaints. Collaboration will be tracked through attendance at the joint operations meetings and the number of disputes resolved under the memorandum without escalation. If the high school's commitment scores remain low after a semester, the coordinator will hold listening sessions with its teachers before adding services; if the middle school's efficacy scores remain low, the answer is more practical support, such as a dedicated scheduling contact. Measuring the change this way lets the coordinator adjust the plan before problems harden.
Consolidating and Anchoring the Change
When the first year closes, the coordinator will consolidate gains by adding services requested by staff, such as vision screening follow-up, and by recommending the third site identified in Module 2. Anchoring the change means making the centers part of how the district works rather than a project dependent on one person: a board policy establishing the centers, a line in the district's health services budget for space and maintenance, the centers' inclusion in new staff orientation and a renewed memorandum with the partner. When the centers appear in the district's routine documents, the change has taken hold.
Conclusion
Leading this change means treating the two schools differently according to their readiness, sequencing the work so that vision, communication, empowerment and early wins reinforce one another, building collaboration through a model that places the centers within the whole school and responding to resistance with respect and evidence. Module 6 turns these strategies into a leadership action plan with dates, owners and measures.
References
Kotter, J. P. (1996). Leading change. Harvard Business School Press.
Lewallen, T. C., Hunt, H., Potts-Datema, W., Zaza, S., & Giles, W. (2015). The Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child model: A new approach for improving educational attainment and healthy development for students. Journal of School Health, 85(11), 729-739. https://doi.org/10.1111/josh.12310
Weiner, B. J. (2009). A theory of organizational readiness for change. Implementation Science, 4, Article 67. https://doi.org/10.1186/1748-5908-4-67
What the HLTH 6433 Module 5 instructions ask for
The fifth HLTH 6433 module often turns to leading change. Prompts commonly ask you to apply a change model to your initiative, describe how you would build collaboration among groups or organizations and explain how you would handle resistance and sustain the change. Some instructors name a model, such as Kotter's stages or Lewin's, and others leave the choice to you. Specialist-level work should diagnose the setting before prescribing steps, since the same change looks different in different units. Build on the stakeholders, decisions and legal groundwork from earlier modules, and describe how you would know the change is taking hold. A section on measuring the change, not only its results, is often welcome.
How this HLTH 6433 Module 5 example is built
The paper begins by separating approval from change. A readiness section applies two components of readiness to each school and reaches different conclusions for each. Kotter's stages are introduced as a checklist, with the first two already completed in earlier modules. Sections on vision and communication, empowering action, short-term wins, collaboration, resistance and anchoring then describe specific actions, such as converting storage rooms, a flu vaccination day, a shared referral protocol and a board policy. A section on tracking the change describes readiness surveys, operational measures and collaboration indicators, and a short conclusion leads into the action plan that follows in the final module.
HLTH 6433 Module 5 rubric: what full marks look like
Instructors usually judge change leadership papers by how well the chosen model fits the setting and how specific the proposed actions are. Rubrics tend to reward a diagnosis of readiness or context before steps are prescribed, concrete actions for each stage and attention to collaboration across organizations. Recognizing the limits of linear change models and treating resistance as information rather than opposition shows judgment at the specialist level. A plan for anchoring the change so that it outlasts the leader earns credit. APA 7 citations for change theory and collaboration models complete the paper. Measures that track readiness and collaboration over time show that the plan can be corrected as it unfolds.
HLTH 6433 Module 5 help from the desk
Change papers often list the stages of a model with a generic sentence under each. If you would like help diagnosing readiness, choosing a change model or turning its stages into actions in your setting, a writer is ready to help. Describe your initiative and the groups involved and attach the prompt; the Module 5 paper that results will fit the model to your setting and describe what you would do at each step. If your instructor prefers a different change model, the paper will use that model instead. We can also help you plan short-term wins that suit your calendar and measures that show whether the change is holding.
Write yours, or have the desk draft it
This paper is an original model document written by our desk, not a submitted student paper and not an official American College of Education document. Read it for the moves, then write your own to the instructions in your classroom. If you want one built to your exact prompt and rubric, the first custom sample is free and arrives in 24 to 48 hours.
More HLTH 6433 and Ed.S. in Public Health Education sample papers
- HLTH 6433 Module 1: Leadership Approach Analysis
- HLTH 6433 Module 2: Data-Informed Decision Paper
- HLTH 6433 Module 3: Relational Skills and Trust
- HLTH 6433 Module 4: Legal and Ethical Analysis
- HLTH 6433 Module 6: Leadership Action Plan
- HLTH 6483 Module 6: Research-Based Recommendation
- HLTH 6483 Module 3: Outbreak Investigation Analysis
- HLTH 6443 Module 2: Policy and Compliance Analysis
- HLTH 6473 Module 1: Revenue Source Analysis
HLTH 6433 Module 5 questions, answered
What does HLTH6433 Module 5 usually ask for?
HLTH6433's fifth module often asks how a health education leader would lead change and build collaboration, using a change model and a plan for working across groups.
What is organizational readiness for change?
Members' shared commitment to a change and shared belief that they can carry it out, which depend on how much they value it and how they judge demands, resources and circumstances.
What are Kotter's eight stages of change?
The sequence runs from creating urgency and assembling an influential coalition, through a widely communicated vision and action freed from obstacles, to early wins, further change built on them and new practices rooted in the culture.
Where can I find a free HLTH 6433 Module 5 sample paper?
This page has the complete Module 5 paper, showing how a coordinator moves two schools and a health partner from board approval to clinics that run as part of the school day.
How should a leader respond to resistance?
Separate objections that reveal flaws in the plan, which should change it, from objections rooted in values, which should be heard and respected without necessarily stopping the change.