In 2011, Dehub funded Charles Sturt University (NSW Australia) and Massey University (NZ) to conduct a partnership research project to explore the following research question:What do the strategies and activities designed to foster change in blended and flexible learning and distance education developed at CSU and MU help us to understand about learning leadership? This presentation provides an overview of the study and it's findings.

1. Managing institutional change through
distributive leadership approaches:
Engaging academics and teaching support staff
in blended and flexible learning
M. Childs, M Brown, M. Keppell, Z Nicholas,
C. Hunter and N. Hard
dehub Report Series 2013

2. Since finalising the report, two of the authors,
Associate Professor Merilyn Childs and Professor
Mike Keppell have relocated to the Australian
Digital Futures Institute, University of Southern
Queensland.
Contact Associate Professor Merilyn Childs at
MerilynChilds [at] gmail.com

3. In 2011, Dehub funded
Charles Sturt University
(NSW Australia) and Massey
University (NZ) to conduct a
partnership research project
to explore the following
research question:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mcbadger/

4. What do the strategies and
activities designed to foster
change in blended and flexible
learning and distance education
developed at CSU and MU help
us to understand about learning
leadership?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jpstanley/

5. http://www.flickr.com/photos/moniharu/
Read the full report
Visit the case studies

6. http://www.flickr.com/photos/keeblerstudios/
The research built on previous
studies concerning distributive
leadership & learning
leadership, through an historic case
study approach (see selected
references)
The study can be thought of as an
‘archaeological dig’ in the context of
the lived experiences of two
universities fostering change in
blended and flexible learning and
distance education during
2008-2012.

7. http://www.flickr.com/photos/rhutch/
Eight case studies
were developed

8. The case studies were understood
using three foci:
1. Connections, collegiality and networks
2. Reflective practice and practice
experimentation
3. Reflections of learning leadership

9. http://www.flickr.com/photos/keeblerstudios/
1. Learning leadership was enabled by the
large and small actions of many people
(Moncrieff 1999) working individually
and collectively in relationship to change
2. The large and small actions of many
people working individually and
collectively were fostered through a
range of different operational models
3. Innovation was fostered through
delegated leadership, distributive
leadership, faculty
scholarship, networked learning and
diffusion of innovation
Findings

10. 4. Innovation in blended and flexible
learning and DE was aligned to
strategic institutional intent through
the influences of staff
5. “Innovation”, “influencing
others”, “collaborating” and
“sharing” had positive connotations
Findings

11. Three key insights
1. Innovation (in BFL and DE) needs to be aligned to institution
vision, and the institution needs to manage the tensions that
can exist between alignment (to vision); and creativity and
innovation.
2. Good practice in BFL and DE needs to be manifested through
sustainable, consistent and supported opportunities.
3. Regardless of the strategy or activity, commitment to
approaches that enable academics to take
time, collaborate, share, network and connect are the key to
innovation in BFL and DE.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/8525214@N06/

12. Five take home messages
1. Strategies and activities
generated from the centre (of a
university) and distributed
throughout an institution need
to be mapped as a basis for
further strategic planning
2. Strategies and activities
generated from the centre
could be evaluated ‘from the
outside’ in order to…
3. Better understand those
initiatives that will have
maximum impact on a wide
range of practices and therefore
should be supported
4. “Top down” leadership is
important; leadership development
strategies need to be in place to
assist positional leaders to develop
leadership capabilities.
5. “Micro-leadership” and “micro-
influencing” is important; further
work is needed to better
understand the best ways of
supporting micro level activities
through, for example, networked
learning, workloads and resources.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ptrlx/

13. http://www.flickr.com/photos/postbear/
Selected References
Lefoe, G., Parrish, D., Hart, G., Smigiel, H., & Pannan, L. (2008). The GREEN report. University of
Wollongong, University of Tasmania,
Flinders University & Latrobe University. Retrieved from
http://www.uow.edu.au/cedir/DistributiveLeadership/docs/resource/GREEN_Resource.pdf
Moncrieff, J. (1999). Is strategy making a difference? Long Range Planning, 32(2), 273-276.
Scott, G., Coates, H., & Anderson, M. (2008). Learning leaders in times of change: Academic leadership capabilities
for Australian
Higher Education. The University of Melbourne.
Retrieved from http://research.acer.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1001&context=higher_education
Yin, R.K. (1981). Case Study Research, Design and Methods, Thousand Oaks, Ca: Sage.
Access the Full Reference List, pp. 61-70.