LEADING AND ADMINISTRATING A DISTANCE EDUCATION PROGRAM
by
Timothy R. Brock
A Paper Presented in Partial Fulfillment
Of the Requirements of
ED7212, Administration and Leadership of Distance Education Programs
October, 2003
|
Address: |
|
|
City, State, Zip: |
|
|
Phone: |
407-677-5647 |
|
E-mail: |
|
|
Instructor: |
Dr. |
|
|
N/A |
Abstract
The paper examines the distance-learning champion in the role of a program administrator and leader. For the role of the administrator, eight key issues the champion must address to create and manage a productive distance education program are reviewed. For the leadership role, six key issues are presented for program success. The key question the paper tries to answer after investigating these two roles is whether distance education will become the latest "flavor of the month" and eventually find itself beside previous tried and forgotten fads. In the end, the answer to that question depends upon the administrator/leader of the distance education initiative.
The
Distance Learning Administrator
Distance learning (a.k.a. distance education, e-learning, web-based training, among others) is the dominant topic of many scholarly journals and professional articles dedicated to education and training. A cursory perusal of industry standards from the education world, like the Chronicle of Higher Education and Review of Educational Research, and from the world of training, like the professional publications Performance Improvement, Training & Development, and Training, reveal a strong interest in distance learning by both disciplines. Furthermore, new publications have surfaced that are dedicated to distance learning initiatives. Syllabus, Technology & Learning, The American Journal of Distance Education, Learning & Training Innovations (formerly e-learning), and The Online Journal of Distance Learning Administration represent a short list of examples. Not to be outdone, book authors such as Hall (1997), Driscoll (1997), Rosenberg (2001), Rossett (2001), and Clark (2003) have added their experience and research to the field. Of course, this surge in popularity of a new theory or technology has been seen before (remember TQM and Statistical Process Control?). This begs the question, is distance learning the latest "flavor of the month"?
This is an important question that a leader and administrator of a distance education program must answer to justify the initial and ongoing expense of an e-learning initiative. The reputations of the sponsoring institution and of the program champion are at stake. It is therefore imperative for the administrator to grasp fully the theories, practices, skills, designs, technologies, and implementation strategies associated with a distance-learning program. It is likewise crucial for the leader to act as a catalyst for change to overcome the resistance and skepticism associated with any initiative that challenges the status quo.
This paper will present a research-based case that addresses the concerns of the champion in both roles of administrator and leader. It is divided into two major sections to distinguish between the two roles. While overlap of duties swing between these two roles, the division provides an organizational distinction to help understand each role.
The first function addressed is that of the administrator. This section will review eight key issues the distance-learning champion must address as the administrator. These issues are related more to managing program requirements.
The second division of the paper will address major issues the distance-learning champion must handle as a leader. The six issues reviewed will help provide the leader with direction and purpose. The six leadership issues are related to developing relationships rather than managing requirements, which the eight administrator issues cover.
The intent of this paper is to provide a framework for action for the distance-learning champion to pursue while serving in both roles. It is not a comprehensive list. It simply compliments what was covered during the course and contributes new considerations for success.
In the role of a distance-learning administrator, the champion must focus on the credibility and effectiveness of the program. To do this, the champion must understand the executive-level issues that, unless proactively addressed, can prevent a distance-learning project from succeeding. The text addressed many of these issues and made a strong case that learning research, technologies, legal considerations like copyright laws, sound instructional design processes, and the characteristics of the learner and instructor are all important (Simonson, Smaldino, Albright, & Zvacek, 2003). However, additional considerations not addressed can play as large, or even a larger, role in determining the success of the initiative.
The first key concept the distance-learning administrator must understand is the instructional philosophy upon which to base the curriculum. Of the two dominant perspectives available, either one can be correct. The selection depends on the audience that the distance learning is directed. If the audience is primarily children or young adults, the most logical approach is the pedagogical approach. On the other hand, if the audience is composed of adult learners, it is best to take an andrological approach. If the administrator fails to ensure the instructional designers select the correct instructional approach for the foundation of the online instructional design, the learning experience will fail.
In their paper on the difference between these two approaches as they affect online instructors, Gibbons and Wentworth (2001) address the important distinction of when a person graduates from the pedagogical preference to the andragogous approach. Going directly to the '"father" of andragogy thinking for the answer, they quote Knowles definition of an adulthood as "the point at which individuals perceive themselves to be essentially self-directing" (p. 2). This definition highlights the importance of conducting a proper learner analysis before designed and developing the online curriculum. Failure to make the right learning approach here will result in the learning experience failure and the distance learning experiment finding itself flung onto the ash heap of other trendy flashes.
Another important element the distance-learning champion must understand and implement is the right instructional architecture. Too many online courses are simply courses designed for delivery in the classroom that are converted to an online course by changing the technologies used to deliver the course rather than redesigning the course to take advantage of the technologies available to enrich the content and focus it on the cognitive, motivational, historical experiences and needs of the learners. The informed administrator is wise to consider the four architectural taxonomies proposed by Clark, which she classifies as the receptive, behavioral, guided discovery, and exploratory architectures (2000).
Clark's (2000) four architectures provide a needed instructional foundation the administrator can consider and evaluate. They do not require a background in instructional design or instructional technology to understand and use them. For example, with courses that require the dispensation of information via lecture, video, or text in a highly controlled environment, the receptive mode is the best approach because it treats the learner like a receptacle into which knowledge is poured. If the focus is more on developing the skills sets of the learners through demonstration and practice, then the behavioral architecture is suggested. If the learner needs to develop good metacognitive skills and decision-making abilities, then a guided discovery approach seems to fit since learning is based on case studies and problem solving. Feedback is given because of an action that resembles real-world consequences for that action. Finally, if the online material is intended more as a reference library that the learner can choose to access when needed and in whatever order is desired, then the exploratory architecture is the leading candidate.
These architectures tend to lend themselves well to the two strategies discussed earlier because the directive architecture resembles the teacher-focused transfer of information associated with early pedagogical approaches while the behavioral, guided discovery, and exploratory are more learner-centered and reflective of the andragogous perspective. While pedagogical research has grown and now offers many sound educational alternatives that engage learners, the teacher is still seen, in most cases, as the primary source of information, especially at the lower grades.
Even though this overview is presented at an executive level of detail, it demonstrates the thought process and questions the administrator could consider to choose the best taxonomy to produce the desired results of the course. This, in turn, will help protect the integrity and reputation of this delivery medium.
While the first two managerial variables take an instructional perspective, the next two consider the people part of the equation. The distance-learning administrator must understand and make allowances for both the faculty and students who will interact via the technological marvels manipulated to create the proper learning environment.
The administrator must pay attention to the educators who deliver the instruction online to earn their trust and buy-in to this form of delivery. Kuchinke, Aragon, and Bartlett (2001) address distance learner issues from the perspective of the instructor. They reviewed the lessons learned from their experience of taking traditional classroom instruction online and addressed two questions: "how to prepare students for learning on line and what organizational and pedagogical measures promote students' learning on line" (p. 20).
According to these writers, instructors are concerned about the academic rigors, instructional design, learning opportunities, and structure of the course. These variables are related to the second question posed by the article. The due diligence exercised during the instructional strategies and architectural alternatives phases will help alleviate these concerns. Selecting the most suitable strategy (pedagogy versus andragogy) and the appropriate architecture will provide the administrator the logic and arguments needed to persuade instructors regarding these issues.
Another issue the administrator must prepare to overcome as the distance-learning champion, raised by McFadden, Marsh, and Price, is the tendency of instructors to want to replicate their classroom instructional methodologies online by using high-cost technologies (1999). Their research indicates that most classroom instructors do not understand the effectiveness of less costly technologies when they are coupled with sound instructional design that uses asynchronous learning options. Instead, instructors want to use the costlier technologies necessary to transport their classroom experience to remote learners rather than the low-cost technologies that research has demonstrated as equally effective (Beare, 1989; Moore & Thompson, 1990; Russell, 1997), as McFadden et al report (1999).
The paradigm shift needed by classroom instructors will pose a challenge to the distance-learning administrator. The challenge will be to persuade those instructors married to the lecture to change their "attitudes, expectations, and experiences that form the culture of the university" (McFadden et al., 1999, p. 7.). Failure to convert the skeptics will, as the McFadden article put it, result in losing students and revenue to those institutions that overcome this prejudice.
Having set the stage with the proper instructional strategy and learning architecture as well as dealing with instructor concerns and issues involving instructional integrity, learner interaction, and technology validity, the administrator must continue to remain diligent to address problem students and faculty to prevent poor or unpleasant learning experiences that result in high attrition rates.
Tobin (2001) deals with this issue thoroughly and is quick to point out that those students who need additional help setting up their accounts or who always seem to be needing help from the instructor are not considered problems. Rather, these students are the bread-and-butter of the online learning world because they are engaged, learning, and will eventually become self-sustaining. The problem students are those who disrupt the learning environment and hinder learning for others. At the other end of the spectrum is the problem faculty member. Their sins are, as Tobin puts it, that they are "either inconsiderate to their students or are unsupportive to their student's learning needs" (p. 1). The administrator needs to anticipate problem students and faculty by having the proper policies and procedures in place to first, try to prevent these situations from happening though faculty and student training and organizational support, and second, by having clear standards on how to resolve these issues when they do occur.
Another issue the administrator must
overcome is the silo thinking of being either higher education distance
learning or corporate distance learning.
Massie (2003) makes a persuasive argument
about how each realm can benefit from the strengths of the other. The article argues that the corporate world
can benefit from the learning content and processes of higher education. On the other hand, the higher education world
needs corporate knowledge and content to prepare students for the real world
from
The last thing a distance-learning administrator wants to hear is "we've been hacked" or "students have figured out how to bypass our firewalls". In this age of heightened Homeland Security against outside attack, the administrator needs to take proactive precautionary actions to ensure for "HomeNet" Security. As with instructional technology and design issues, the administrator does not need to become a network security expert. Rather, the distance-learning champion must make sure this issue is dealt with effectively to protect the integrity of the delivery system.
Fryer (2003) offers six school security considerations and proposed solutions that the administrator must consider. These issues are broad enough to warrant the administrator's attention without requiring an in-depth understanding of the technologies involved. They are executive-level concerns with executive-level solutions.
One consideration offered was to ensure faculty, staff, and learners have access to appropriate network resources to develop a network rights strategy. Another is to minimize potential risks from external hackers by blocking unauthorized access from the outside world. These two examples demonstrate the high-level approach of the considerations that the administrator can address. Yet, the article dives into the details for implementing the solutions to satisfy those who want to "look under the hood" to see how it all works.
Two bonuses the article offers are five questions that identify the red flags for internal security threats and a security savvy pop quiz (Fryer, 2003, pp. 10-12) . The red flag questions provide a good list of issues the administrator should enforce and monitor on a regular basis. The five-question pop quiz provides additional insight the administrator needs consider and implement to ensure for the security of the system.
In sum, the distance-learning champion has many responsibilities while wearing the administrator hat. This section briefly examined eight of those duties. The next section will look at six key responsibilities the distance-learning champion has while wearing the leadership hat.
When leading a distance-learning venture, the champion's perspective is different from that of an administrator. Bennis and Nanus (1985) distinguish between the two roles by say leaders "do the right things" and managers "do things right.". Theories about leaders have evolved and seem to have lighted upon the transformative leader who has four basic assumptions about the role of leaders as change agents, values infusers, leader developers, and involver of others (Astin & Astin, 2001). The distance-learning champion will have many opportunities to act as a change agent along with the other characteristics of a transformative leader to blaze the path and light the way for the distance-learning initiative.
It is apparent to even the casual observer that distance learning is a different learning medium that will require leaders of traditional learning to assume new roles. The shift from the physical classroom to the virtual classroom would seem an easy transition until the discussion moves from overheads, slide projectors, and chalk to synchronous whiteboard conferencing, asynchronous sharing, and chat facilities (Marsh II, McFadden, & Price, 1999).
Beaudoin (2003) suggests this transition requires new roles of leaders. Unfortunately, according to Beaudoin, many institutions of higher learners are still stuck in the "old economy". The same can be said of some businesses when it comes to training and educating their employees. The distance education leader must, therefore, serve as a catalyst of change for the institution to remain competitive (2003).
Another important leadership perspective Beaudoin raises is the need for the leader to shift "focus from the micro issues around technology and its impact on learners to a more macro view of institutions and the impact of technology in this larger context" (2003, p. 13). Distance learning leaders must lift their eyes beyond the world of technology and scan the larger horizon in the distance. Issues they need to pursue are duties like needs assessment, strategic planning, leveraging technology, stakeholder building, and program evaluation and accreditation, etc. (Beaudoin, 2003). In other words, the leader must remain above the details of technology and let the technologists do that job.
No discussion of leadership can begin without a short campfire visit around the topic of vision. Vision serves as a change agent for the leader two ways. Cashman (1998) raises the vision specter as an element of leadership to change the leader from an ontological perspective—i.e., changing the essence or being of the leader internally. On the other hand, Levy (2003) addresses the importance of vision by the leader for changing the organization. In both cases, vision is at the core of the leader as a change agent. Cashman covered the value-based journey during the course. The organizational change perspective of the distance-learning champion as a leader remains undeveloped. Therefore, the remainder of this section will investigate this element further.
According to Levy, Hatche (2000) makes the point that it is necessary
for a college faculty, staff, and administration to have a vision as a
convincing starting point that will result in a change of organizational
culture. If the vision does not
accomplish this minimal outcome, people won't feel compelled to leave their
comfort zones and will resist disequilibrium (Bennis & Nanus,
1985). In addition, the proposed change must come from
a leader who is considered authentic and creating value (Cashman, 1998). Character matters. As William Penn, the founder of the great
With the current emphasis on distance learning (which is sweeping corporations and campuses nationwide and internationally) comes increased visibility and accountability. In addition, these expectations typically take the form of business outcomes that the distance education program must achieve (Colbrunn & Van Tiem, 2000; Prestera & Moller, 2001). This demand for business results also impacts the training world of corporate America because training departments are now required to prove their worth and to link training and development initiatives to business strategy via alignment (Van Adelsberg & Trolley, 1999). The days of offering programs without regard to Return on Investment (ROI) are over.
Prestera and Moller attempt to introduce a corporate tool called the balanced scorecard to the distance education world (2001). Their model is based on the Organizational Alignment Model from the work of Rummler and Brache (1990), where the variables of organization, process, and job/performer form the nucleus for evaluating the goal-setting, structure, and management practices of the institution for each variable. The individual cells are created where each variable intersects with a practice. Each cell generates a critical question that needs an answer to ensure organizational alignment. It is the distance-learning leader's responsibility to answer each question to ensure the success of the program.
The distance-learning leader must ensure the distance-learning program is aligned with the business needs of the sponsoring organization that authorized the program. Failure will result in frustration, disappointment, and finally, cancellation of the program. Even worse, the original business need will remain unmet.
Detractors always bubble up to resist any change that threatens the status quo. The distance education leader should welcome their skepticism and respond with research. McFadden, Marsh, and Price (1999) offer a short, reasoned argument defending the efficacy of distance education that provides the distance education leader with enough data to counter the arguments of the skeptics. After identifying a major criticism that distance education lacks sound educational practice and theory, McFadden, et al references research by Russell (1997), Moore & Thompson (1990), and Beare (1989) to refute these arguments, particularly the work of Russell who reviewed 52 years of research that reveals a consistent equivalency between distance and traditional learning. Effective leaders need a ready answer to persuade decision-makers and skeptics. Failure to do so will doom the distance learning initiative at the first sign of trouble.
A leader requires followers. In addition, a leader is a change agent, as discussed earlier. The distance education leader is offered a great opportunity to inspire change through the transformation of traditionalist faculty members. The most challenging environment for this transformation to occur is in the academic world. Tradition, academic freedom, and educational institution culture have created an environment at educational institutions that will be as challenging as trying to corral a herd of cats. Yet, it is essential for the success of the program to transform faculty members for the 21st century.
Floyd (2003) espouses the view that leaders need to direct and motivate others forward for success and that the best way to do this is through faculty development. One key activity is recommended—understand faculty unease by listening to them. The leader needs to understand their fears and concerns to provide the right support systems and culture to transform willing faculty members into "technology-savvy 21st century instructors".
On a different note, this faculty function is an example of where overlap occurs between the two roles of the distance-learning champion. However, when faculty was discussed in the administrator section the focus was on instructional issues. In the leadership section, the focus is on the faculty members themselves.
Not only must the distance education leader have a vision, pursue alignment at many levels, advocate the mission, and focus on faculty needs for transformation, but must also have a firm understanding of current and future trends. The term leadership is more future-focused and implies the leader is moving the organization in the right direction for the future market. Therefore, a leader must know and understand future trends for strategic visioning and planning. This is true for those engaged in the corporate world as well as the academic world.
For
example, Training publishes an annual
Industry Report in their October edition.
This one edition of the magazine offers useful data for the business-focused
distance education leader to assess current trends. For example, the survey reveals that the