Hybrid course delivery: a good fit for education leadership  (Page 2/5)

Sergiovanni (2009) agreed, that the campus principal’s physical presence is necessary for instructional leadership to be effective, and while present, the principal should address the following:

• What is actually happening in the classroom?
• What is the teacher and what are the students actually doing?
• What are the actual learning outcomes?
• What ought to actually be going on in this classroom, given the overall goals, educational platform, knowledge of how children learn, and understandings of the structure of the subject matter to be taught?
• What do these events and activities of teaching and learning mean to teachers, students, others?
• What are the personal meanings that students accumulate regardless of teacher intents?
• How do teacher and principal interpretations of teaching reality differ?
• What actions should be taken to bring about even greater understanding of teaching and learning and better congruence between actions and beliefs (p. 282)

Sergiovanni (2009), Fullan (2003), Glickman (2010), Beach and Reinhartz (2000) and others have contributed significantly to the prevalence of literature focusing on effective instructional leadership practices requiring the physical presence of leadership as an essential element of effective school supervision. However, the current general appearance of educational leadership preparation programs in higher education reveal a movement away from learning experiences requiring students’ face to face interactions, instead moving toward fully digital or online learning experiences.

Fully online program growth

Kern, (2010) reported that approximately one fourth of the 19 million students enrolled in higher education were enrolled in at least one online course during the fall of 2008. She adds that this is a 17 percent increase over the previous year’s totals. Today, more than 3,300 of the roughly 4,500 colleges and universities offer at least one online course. The Babson Survey Research Group (2009) reported that more than 1,700 schools offer fully online programs.

Schank (2001), Ascough (2002), and Rosie (2002) believe that online course delivery is pedagogically superior to traditional course delivery. They profess, when prepared correctly, online courses promote student’s critical thinking skills, and encourage collaborative learning and problem solving skills. Proponents also argue that online course delivery encourages non-discriminatory teaching and learning practices since all students must participate with equal access to fellow students and instructors. Online learning environments can allow educators and students to exchange ideas and information, work together on projects, around the clock, from anywhere in the world, using multiple communication modes. They argue that it permits a full range of interactive methodologies, and instructors have found that in adapting their courses to online models, they are paying more attention to the instructional design of their courses. As a result, the quality, quantity, and patterns of communication students practice during learning are improved.