OLE_Griffith 2_13
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

OLE_Griffith 2_13

on

  • 904 views

Presentation of the recent OLT funded Leadership Project on creating a sustainable quality process for mediating an institutions online learning environments (OLEs). Presented at Griffith University & ...

Presentation of the recent OLT funded Leadership Project on creating a sustainable quality process for mediating an institutions online learning environments (OLEs). Presented at Griffith University & Feb 2013.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
904
Views on SlideShare
903
Embed Views
1

Actions

Likes
0
Downloads
1
Comments
0

1 Embed 1

http://www.linkedin.com 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Microsoft PowerPoint

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

OLE_Griffith 2_13 OLE_Griffith 2_13 Presentation Transcript

  • Building distributed leadership indesigning and implementing aquality management framework forOnline Learning EnvironmentsPresented byAssociate Professor Michael SankeyDirector, Learning Environments and MediaOn behalf of the project team
  • Introduction Project leads L to R: Margaret Hicks (USA), Robert Hollenbeck & Garry Allen (RMIT), Michael Sankey (USQ) Dale Holt, Stuart Palmer (Deakin) Maree Gosper (Macquarie) & Judy Munro (Deakin). Absent: Ian Solomonides (Macquarie). This project was to design and implement a framework that uses a distributed leadership (DL) approach for the quality management of Online Learning Environments (OLE).
  • Aim of the project1. To help managers better conceptualise what needs to be managed well with online learning environments to assure their quality (QA) and continuous quality improvement (CQI). This task takes place in relatively stable organisational environments where most elements are in place, being managed quite effectively, and where associated leadership structures are reasonably functioning.2. To help leaders better conceptualise what needs to be led and how distributed leadership capacity building might be developed, in times of major flux and instability where institutions are undergoing major renewal and transformation.
  • Four key aspects1. Framing the Quality Management of OLEs in Australian HE through distributed leadership2. Institutional profiling using the Quality Management Framework3. Actioning the elements of the Quality Management Framework4. Developing distributed leadership to enhance the quality management of OLEs
  • Project website:http://myqr.co/I6Ld
  • Four phases to the project Phase 1: (Nov 2010-Apr 2011) Development of draft OLE quality management framework and establishment of distributed leadership teams in partner institutions Phase 2: (May 2011-Dec 2011) Trial and further development of various aspects of draft OLE management framework as supported by distributed leadership teams Phase 3: (Jan 2012-May 2012) Full scale implementation of OLE quality management framework as supported by distributed leadership teams Phase 4: (Jun 2012- Nov 2012) Finalisation and evaluation of the OLE quality management framework
  • 6EOLE Quality Management Framework
  • OLE quality management QM as it relates to an HE institution:  Planning  Technologies  Organisational structure  Evaluation  Governance  Resourcing
  • What do the six elements mean? Planning: external environmental analysis and trend spotting, strategic intelligence gathering, external benchmarking, organisational capacity analysis, institutional purpose, reputation, vision, principles, objectives and strategies, accountabilities, timelines, and resource implications. Technologies (for teaching and learning): type, range, integration, promotion, and innovation and mainstreaming of emerging technologies.
  • Cont… Organisational structure: nature, range, coordination and delivery of valued services (underpinned by clarity of understanding of needed expertise/staffing capabilities) for staff and students. Evaluation: stakeholder’s needs, methods, reporting, decision making through governance structures, evaluation relating to the initial selection of new technology, and evidence gathering relating to the on-going assessment of its performance, value and impact.
  • Cont…  Governance: institutional, faculty and school/department committees and forums (and associated responsibilities and accountabilities), policies and standards.  Resourcing: maintenance and enhancement of technologies, skills recognition and staff development, media production, evaluation activities, governance mechanisms, i.e. all other elements.
  • The overall model The Institutional planning and quality cycle, as represented in the framework, is seen to represent ongoing planning, implementing, evalu ating, reviewing and improving functions encapsulating all of the organisations core business activities.
  • 10 Assumptions1. Various ICTs constitute an institution’s OLEs and demand a total approach to quality management.2. Certain ICTs have been designed specifically for educational uses and are institutionally controlled and supported for mainstream use.3. Other ICTs (Web2/social-media/cloud-based) are not controlled and supported by the institution.4. Non-corporate ICTs may be locally developed and supported within the institution, supported centrally by the organisation for limited selective use or located outside the institution for open use.5. The total QM of OLEs requires the broadest conception of the variety of ICTs their purposes & strategic approaches to the leadership of their use in sustainable & responsive ways.
  • 10 Assumptions cont…6. A QM framework needs to encompass a range of elements that must be taken into account for deriving the best possible T&L value (experiences & outcomes) from all investments in ICTs.7. Investments cover staff & student time, production of resources & various budget expenditures on hardware, software and networks.8. Staff time covers all relevant academic, non-academic & professional staff throughout the organisation.9. Q’s around how QM can best be done given the changing nature of ICTs & institutional demands placed on leadership to respond to these pressures & trends in positioning institutions to be competitive HE marketplace.10.While common elements of QM are evident & questions of shared significance identifiable, QM approaches are contingent on institutional histories & future aspirations.
  • Expectations re. quality of OLEs A whole-of-institution approach. OLEs are strategically situated in the organisation’s positioning in the HE marketplace. Strategic positioning to deal with all aspects of the institution’s curriculum, i.e. design, delivery and staffing. Through a broad range of teaching & support staff, students will derive the best possible value from the use of OLEs. That OLEs are sustainable & responsive to changing circumstances within and external to the organisation. Future ICT trend forecasting and the capacity to foster innovation & the measured integration of ICTs The development of capacities (skills & resources) to best address each of the six elements in the framework. Given the complexity of the task and the range & types of both formal & informal leadership expertise involved, an enhanced form of distributed leadership is present.
  • Building Distributed Leadership “Distributed leadership essentially involves both the vertical and lateral dimensions of leadership practice. Distributed leadership encompasses both formal and the informal forms of leadership practice within its framing, analysis and interpretation. It is primarily concerned with the co-performance of leadership and the reciprocal interdependencies that shape that leadership practice” (Harris, 2009, p.5).Harris, A. (2009) (Ed.). Distributed leadership: different perspectives. Dordrecht: Springer.
  • Prominent alignments for HE Vertically amongst faculty formal leaders in hierarchy Vertically amongst Senior Executive leaders and faculty formal leaders Horizontally amongst Senior Executive leaders Horizontally amongst faculty formal leaders across hierarchies Horizontally amongst Senior Executive leaders and across faculty leadership Informal academic and professional support leadership horizontally amongst staff at discipline, school, faculty and interfaculty levels/domains Informal leadership at particular locations in multi- campus environments.
  • Capacity building “Capacity building involves the use of strategies that increase the collective effectiveness of all levels of the system in developing and mobilizing knowledge, resources and motivation, all of which are needed to raise the bar and close the gap of student learning across the system” (Fullan, Hill & Crevola, 2006, p.88).Fullan, M., Hill, P. & Crevola, C. (2006) Breakthrough, CA: Corwin Press.
  • But why DL for OLEs?The leadership of quality online learning environmentsis becoming more complex and demanding as we see the: growing size & reach of uni (some with offshore campus operations, many involving strategic partnerships), growing number of ICTs which constitute such environments, loosening of institutional control over certain technologies used for effective learning and teaching, greater size and more diverse composition of universities’ workforces and student populations a greater multiplicity of curricular & pedagogical models which underlie an ever-expanding range of occupations & professions requiring higher level education, intensifying of national and global competition in the e- learning marketplace.
  • So, we see that… No one formal leader at the top, no matter how ambitious and knowledgeable, could possibly contend with the complexity of issues related to the quality management of OLEs. Leaders must be mobilized down, across and throughout the organisation to realise the full benefits of massive institutional investments in OLEs.
  • Capacity building of DL involves…1. Enabled individual and collective agency2. Co-created and shared vision3. Inclusive of all those who lead4. Broadest recognition of leadership5. Communicative and engaging6. Appropriate responsibilities7. Meaningful rewards8. Trusting and respectful9. Collaborative in development10. Nurturing of valued professional expertise11. Valuing professional forums and communities12. Continuity and sustainability
  • Planning & Budgeting
  • Planning activity
  • Technologies  The role of Mentors and Champions should not be underplayed  Threshold standards level playing field
  • Defined minimum standards1. An introductory message, posted before the start of semester, which:  welcomes students to the course;  introduces the teaching team for the course;  describes how the StudyDesk space will be used throughout the semester; and  explains how students may obtain support by appropriately directing academic or technical. enquiries.2. Checking of discussions and other student access areas on at least three [3] working days per week in order to:  monitor and moderate comments and discussion by students;  manage course operation by responding to student enquiries and learning activities.3. Student requests for clarification or assistance should be responded to as soon as possible, but certainly within 48 hours during the working week.
  • Technologies (for T&L)
  • Organisational ETC...
  • Organisational structure
  • Governance Academic strategy and Corporate strategy, policy funding and policy
  • Governance activity
  • Planning & Budgeting
  • Resourcing
  • Actioning relationships amongstelements
  • The ACODE Benchmarks
  • Currently 81. Institution policy and governance for technology supported learning and teaching2. Planning for, and quality improvement of the integration of technologies for learning and teaching3. Information technology infrastructure to support learning and teaching4. Pedagogical application of information and communication technology5. Professional/staff development for the effective use of technologies for learning and teaching6. Staff support for the use of technologies for learning and teaching7. Student training for the effective use of technologies for learning8. Student support for the use of technologies for learning
  • 6EOLE Quality Management Framework
  • Questions...http://myqr.co/I6Ld