6.1 Evaluation of an online technology leadership master's program  (Page 2/16)

Introduction

Concerns have arisen about the effectiveness of online graduate programs compared to more traditional approaches in higher education settings. This research study investigated the effectiveness of an online Educational Technology Leadership (ETL) master’s program to advance graduates’ leadership in the use of online learning, Web 2.0 tools, and technology professional development in PK-12 schools. A review of the literature indicated agreement that leadership is vital to continuous school improvement, and the quality of teachers directly impacts PK-12 student learning (Podmostko, 2001). Furthermore, building the leadership of technology using teachers appeared to be of significant interest to ensure all PK-12 students receive high quality instruction using 21st century technology tools. Moreover, graduates expressed interest in expanded career options in leadership roles as administrators, district technology coordinators, and technology professional development providers.

Background and literature review

Educational leadership has been a critical component to providing an environment conducive to effective teaching and learning. Candidates in an Educational Technology Leadership master’s program were provided with the leadership skills necessary to implement changes required for 21st century teaching and learning. These change leaders learned how to determine the procedures and processes that create the conditions necessary for organizational improvement. The literature relevant to this study included educational leadership with a focus on teacher leadership to administrative leadership, the use of online learning for personal learning and student learning, the use of Web 2.0 tools for teaching and learning, and the use of effective professional development for changing professional practices.

Educational leadership

Possibly, the most important single factor of an effective learning environment has been educational leadership (Daugherty, Kelley,&Thornton, 2005). Second only to quality curriculum and teacher instruction, leadership has been considered important in student learning (Leithwood&Riehl, 2003). Change leaders must have determined the procedures and processes that created the conditions necessary for organizational improvement. In addition, skillful leaders had a shared responsibility to provide vision for future needs and empowered others to share and operationalize the vision (Daugherty, et al.; Leithwood&Riehl, 2003). Historically, school districts have continually struggled to attract and retain highly qualified candidates for leadership roles (Knapp, Copland&Talbert, 2003). According to Leithwood and Riehl (2003), a current approach was to share leadership between administrators and teacher leaders. Administrators offered a more formal approach to leadership, while teacher leaders presented an informal approach. Glendinning (2005) reported that schools sought leaders who understood teaching and learning. Since classroom teachers routinely possessed those skills, it made sense that administrators tended to evolve from those classroom teachers. With the nearly 40% of principals’ positions that became vacant in 2010, it became crucial for schools to invest in the leadership capacity of their teachers (Ballek, O’Rourke, Provenzanom&Bellamy, 2005).