Moving Toward PedagogicalChange: Faculty, Teaching withTechnology and Leadership COHERE 2012 Calgary Dr. M. Cleveland-Innes Athabasca University 1
The argument“All the teaching development and technology training possiblewill not yield the teaching change required in the 21st century,even for the most motivated, until the context changes, suchthat teaching is a central focus, rewarded and supported inways that it has not in the past .” SSHRC proposal 2011 COHERE 2012 Calgary 2
Pedagogical Development Embedded material COHERE 2012 Calgary Learning theory + Technology X Factor 3
Pedagogical Development1. Plan for the creation of open communication and trust2. Plan for critical reflection and discourse3. Establish community and cohesion COHERE 2012 Calgary4. Establish inquiry dynamics (purposeful inquiry)5. Sustain respect and responsibility6. Sustain inquiry that moves to resolution7. Ensure assessment is congruent with intended processes and outcomes 4
Post-industrialCharacteristicseducation, and its role in society.• understaning of the purpose of Education is fundamentally characterized by a quest for improving the human condition. It is to overcome social and economic challenges, resolve inequities, promote societal power and prowess and allow for individual development. Schofield, 1999• ….. the newly emerging society requires an education system that COHERE 2012 Calgary takes advantage of the democratization and contestation of knowledge and promotes technological and cross-cultural citizenship. Bloland, 2006• a network of interacting individuals and partnerships• flexibility, boundary openness• dispersed complexity, variability• concerted, collaborative action through relationships• central support 5 • Adapted from Bennett, 2002
Post-industrial StructuresIn 2020, higher education will not be much different from the way it is today.While people will be accessing more resources in classrooms through the useof large screens, teleconferencing, and personal wireless smart devices, mostuniversities will mostly require in-person, on-campus attendance of studentsmost of the time at courses featuring a lot of traditional lectures. Mostuniversities’ assessment of learning and their requirements for graduation willbe about the same as they are now. COHERE 2012 CalgaryORBy 2020, higher education will be quite different from the way it is today.There will be mass adoption of teleconferencing and distance learning toleverage expert resources. Significant numbers of learning activities will moveto individualized, just-in-time learning approaches. There will be a transition to“hybrid” classes that combine online learning components with less-frequenton-campus, in-person class meetings. Most universities’ assessment oflearning will take into account more individually-oriented outcomes andcapacities that are relevant to subject mastery. Requirements for graduation 6will be significantly shifted to customized outcomes.
Leadership Strategy……an entrepreneurial culture is emerging ineducation, and that multiple leadership strategiesare required to embed this new culture and makethe resulting changes to organizational structuresand processes. This context is critical to our COHERE 2012 Calgaryconsiderations of leadership in education, madeeven more interesting by changing technology andother societal changes. Latchem, C., & Hanna, D. E. (2001). Leadership in open and flexible learning. In C. Latchem & D. E. Hanna (Eds.),Leadership for 21st century learning: Global perspectives from educational innovators (pp. 53-62). Oxon, UK: Routledge 8
Leadership Strategy(The higher education leader) All those involved in education ofthe 21st century will exhibit strong character, well-developedpersonal skills and the ability to create and communicate vision(Garrison & Vaughan 2008). In addition to these personal traits,(this new leader) these people will be willing and able to 1. COHERE 2012 Calgarymanage change and innovation 2. listen to and assiststakeholders, maintaining and enhancing relationships betweenthe institution and relevant partners, 3. embrace the realities ofnetwork environments and 4. ensure transformation to a newmodel of teaching and learning. (Cleveland-Innes & Sangra,2011). 9
Leadership StrategyTo what extent is the transition to blendedand online learning in higher education,where is does or could occur, followingleadership models for 21st century post- COHERE 2012 Calgaryindustrial society? 10
Some interesting referencesAllen, I. E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Learning on Demand: OnlineEducation in the United States. Newburyport, MA: The SloanConsortium.Atkinson, M.P. (2001). The scholarship of teaching and learning: Congress 2011 CSSHEReconceptualizing scholarship and transforming the academy.Social Forces 79(4), 1217-1229Blau, J.R. & Goodman, N., eds. (1995). Social roles & socialinstitutions. New Brunswick: Transaction Publishers.Cleveland-Innes, M. & Garrison, D. R. (2010). An introduction to 12distance education: Understanding teaching and learning in anew era. New York: Routledge.
Cleveland-Innes, M. & Garrison, D.R. (2009). The role of learnerin an online community of inquiry: Instructor support for firsttime online learners. In N. Karacapilidis (Ed.), Solutions andinnovations in web-based technologies for augmented learning:Improved platforms, tools and applications. p. 167-184. Hershey,PA, USA: IGI Global.Cleveland-Innes, M., Sangra-Morer, A., & Garrison, R. (October, Congress 2011 CSSHE2008). The art of teaching in an online community of inquiry: Theonline teacher as bricoleur. Paper presented at 5th EuropeanDistance Education Network Research Workshop, Paris, France.Davidson-Shivers, G. V. (2009). Frequency and types ofinstructor-interactions in online instruction. Journal ofInteractive Online Learning 8(1). Retrieved September 28, 2010from www.ncolr.org/jiol/issues/PDF/8.1.2.pdf 13
Fairweather, J. S. (2002). The mythologies of facultyproductivity: Implications for institutional policy and decisionmaking. The Journal of Higher Education 73(1). RetrievedSeptember 23, 2010 fromhttp://184.108.40.206/upload/soft/0000/73.1fairweather02%5B1%5D.pdfGudea, S.R. (2008). Expectations and demands in online Congress 2011 CSSHEteaching: Practical experiences. USA: IGI Publishing.Kanwar, M. & Swenson, D. (2000). Canadian Sociology. Iowa:Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.Kendall, D., Murray, J., & Linden, R. Sociology in our times. (2nded.). Ontario: Canadian Cataloguing in Publication 14
Maxwell, J.A. (2005). Qualitative research design. An interactiveapproach, 2nd edition. New York: Sage Publications.Rhoades, G. (2006). The higher education we choose: A questionof balance. The Review of Higher Education 29(3), 381-404.Retrieved August 25, 2010, from Project MUSE database.Rhoades, G. & Maitland, C. (2004). Bargaining Workload andWorkforce on the High Tech Campus. The NEA 2004 Almanac of Congress 2011 CSSHEHigher Education (pp.75-81). Retrieved fromhttp://www.nea.org/assets/img/PubAlmanac/ALM_04_06.pdfTomei, L. (2004). The impact of online teaching on faculty load:Computing the ideal class size for online courses. InternationalJournal of Instructional Technology & Distance Learning 1(1).Retrieved from 15http://www.itdl.org/journal/Jan_04/article04.htm
Yick, A., Patrick, P., & Costin, A. (2005). Navigating distance andtraditional higher education: Online faculty experiences. TheInternational Review Of Research In Open And DistanceLearning, 6(2). Retrieved fromhttp://www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/235 Congress 2011 CSSHE 16
THANK YOUI would like to acknowledge the support of the Academic Research Committee at Athabasca University in the form of a Mission Critical Research Grant and the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council for their support of this research.