2.4 Transformative pedagogy through advanced technologies: a  (Page 8/8)

Conclusion

The alignment of the survey and qualitative data of participants is remarkable. The online environment seemed to create a space where a community of inquiry was formed and authentic leadership learning occurred. In many ways the online space was a more powerful catalyst for deep reflection and leadership learning than that of the partnership program. The university-district program is nested in the context of one district and the in person structure promoted the development of a community that was dependent upon and influenced by the relationships between and among the participants. The online environment decreased the capacity for individual voices to have more power and influence over others. The online expectations for participation were explicit and equal for all participants. These conditions helped promote an equitable environment for learning.

The ongoing building of relationships among students, cohort instructors, and course professors where all were seen as simultaneously teachers and learners was another important factor in the transformative inquiry pedagogical process. Throughout this process and because of the importance of communication and exchange, relationship became an integral part of the online learning experience. Critical to the success of a distance learning professional preparation program is the intentional reciprocation of roles among cohort members, modeled by the faculty team from the very beginning of the program during the first in-person workshop. The implication for a participatory praxis of adult education online is simple: it is found in the authentic voices of the learners as they collaboratively create knowledge and self-determine personal growth within their community of peer learners (Tisdell, et al., 2004). The post-modernist turn in leader preparation means taking space to think about underlying power structures, biases, prejudices, and mental models. This “thinking about thinking” or metacognitive awareness allows for a deconstruction of the positivistic notion of knowledge serves to transform leadership from compliance to inquiry. A number of strategies can be utilized to develop metacognitive behavior, including: connections to previous knowledge, dialogue and reflection on the process of thinking, deliberate selection of thinking strategies, and self assessment (Dirkes, 1985; Hartman, 2001). Indeed, the awareness of thinking and inquiry of self should become a normative part of the inquiry stance of school leaders. This awareness is enriched by an understanding of social power structures and inter-group communication and meaning-making suggesting that awareness of the personal and public contexts should be a part of the metacognitive reflection process.

The public display of work on the ePortfolio provided an accountable forum that simulated the political nature of leadership and fostered sensitivity and awareness of multiple perspectives. The documentation through online threaded discussions and reflection journals provided an effective means of promoting critical inquiry and assessing the progression of leadership learning. In short, the use of online technologies allowed for the enhanced explicitness of three essential elements: equity, assessment, and critical inquiry. Online displays of dialogue, work, and reflective spaces allowed participants and instructors the space to critically reflect not only on the outcomes of participant work, but also on the processes themselves. This exposition allowed for a granular understanding of the critical nature of the participants’ inquiry which in turn afforded a more nuanced and richer picture for faculty to assess participant learning outcomes.

References

• Angelo, T. A. (1995). Beginning the dialogue: Thoughts on promoting critical thinking: Classroom assessment for critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology , 22(1), 6-7.
• Arend, B. (2009, January). Encouraging critical thinking in online threaded discussions. The Journal of Educators Online , 6 (1), 1-23.
• Argyris, C. (1990). Overcoming organizational defenses: Facilitating organizational learning. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
• Argyris, C.&Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective . Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Company.
• Brooks, P. (1998). Cohort communities in higher education: The best example of adult education. from: http://www.edst.educ.ubc.ca/aerc/1998/98brooks.htm
• Cochran-Smith, M.&Lytle, S. L. (2009). Inquiry as stance. New York: Teachers College Press.
• Deal, T. E.&Peterson, K. D. (1999). Shaping school culture: The heart of leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
• Dede, C. (1995). The transformation of distance education to distributed learning. InTRO.http://129.7.160.78/InTRO.htm.
• Dirkes, M. A. (1985, November). Metacognition: Students in charge of their thinking. Roeper Review , 8(2), 96-100. EJ 329 760.
• Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Garrison, D. R. (2003). Cognitive presence for effective asynchronous online learning: the role of reflective inquiry, self-direction and metacognition. In J. Bourne&J. C. Moore (eds.), Elements of Quality Online Education: Practice and Direction , 47–58. Needham, MA: Sloan-C.
• Harri-Augstein, S.&Thomas, L. (1991). Learning conversations: The self-organixed learning way to personal and organizational growth. London: Routledge.
• Hartman, H. J. (2001). Teaching metacognitively. In H. J. Hartman (Ed.), Metacognition in learning and instruction: Theory, research and practice . Boston: Kluwer.
• Heifetz, R.,&Linsky, M. (2002) Leadership on the line: Staying alive through the dangers of leading. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
• Hora, M. T.&Millar, S.B. (2011). A guide to building education partnerships: Navigating diverse cultural contexts to turn challenge into promise. Sterling, VA: Stylus Publishing.
• Kearsley, G.,&Shneiderman, B. (1998). Engagement theory: A framework for technology-based teaching and learning. Educational Technology , 38(5), 20-23.
• King, A. (1995). Designing the instructional process to enhance critical thinking across the curriculum: Inquiring minds really do want to know: Using questioning to teach critical thinking. Teaching of Psychology , 22 (1), 13-17.
• Korach, S. (2008, November). The link between pedagogy and practice: Intra-institutional research to evaluate the effectiveness of principal preparation. Presentation at the University Council of Educational Administration Convention. Orlando, Florida.
• Korach, S. (2005, November). Pioneering leaders promoting change: The impact of an aspiring principal preparation program. Presentation at University Council of Educational Administration Convention, Nashville, Tennessee.
• MacKnight, C. B. (2000). Teaching critical thinking through online discussions. Educause Quarterly , 4, 38-41.
• Nelson, C. E. (1994) Critical thinking and collaborative learning, in: K. Bosworth&S. Hamilton (Eds) Collaborative Learning and College Teaching . Jossey-Bass: San Francisco, CA.
• Orr, M. T. (2011) Pipeline to preparation to advancement: Graduates’ experiences in, through, and beyond leadership preparation. Educational Administration Quarterly , 47, 114-172.
• Senge, P. M. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and practice of the learning organization. New York: Doubleday.
• Strohschen, G.&Heaney, T. (2000). This isn't Kansas anymore, Toto: Team teaching online. In M. J. Eisen&E. Tisdell (Eds.), Team teaching and learning in adult education (pp. 33-42). New Directions for Adult and Continuing Education, 87. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Tisdell, E. J., Strohschen, G. I. E., Carver, M. L., Corrigan, P., Nash, J., Nelson, M., Royer, M., Strom-Mackey, R.,&O’Connor, M. (2004). Cohort Learning Online in Graduate HigherEducation: Constructing Knowledge in Cyber Community . Educational Technology&Society, 7 (1), 115-127.
• Wheatley, M. J. (2001). Leadership and the new science: Discovering order in a chaotic world. San Francisco, CA: Berrett-Koehler Publishers.