172 TECHNOLOGY FOR PREPARATION PROGRAMS
The ultimate effect of distance education depends on professors, including those who
do not teach online. If they elect to remain on the high ground where they can
complain and criticize without getting their feet wet, then the continuing spiral
described previously seems inevitable. If instead, they bravely wade into the murky
water and engage university administrators and colleagues in meaningful discourse,
they demonstrate that rigor and relevance are no less important and no less possible
for this medium than they are for face-to-face classes (p. 30).In our program, the instructors are all faculty who teach the same courses on campus as
they do online. Online courses in this program are considered supplemental, and are not part
of the normal, paid teaching load of a university faculty member. The NCATE-approved
program mirrors the on-campus program. Therefore, the corresponding NCATE standards,
course content and objectives have already been developed for the on-campus program.
Development of the online courses necessitates making the existing content fit the online
format by time-compressing syllabi and encompassing human interaction in the online
delivery.
The design for the class to insure the human interaction must come from the instructor of
the course. The faculty member should encourage and expect interaction through cohort
discussions (asynchronous) and assignments that create the need for interaction within their
school building and school district. Assignments that require interviewing, shadowing,
leading teacher teams, and asking questions of fellow educators provide networking
opportunities and school district connections important to the growth and development of the
person as a school leader. They also create an awareness of the student’s interest in becoming
one of the district’s principals and leaders, an important aspect of finding a job after the
degree. A recent program graduate, in his electronic portfolio “final reflection,” stated:
One of the biggest plusses of the Educational Leadership Program was the interview
requirement. As a general rule, a regular teacher does not get to interview the
principal, superintendent, and treasurer on a regular basis. Some of the most eye-
opening moments over the past two years have come from the interviews with these
personnel.Students have also informed the faculty, through exit interviews, that they appreciated
video clips that feature the instructor. They want to put a face on the instruction and direction
they receive. It seems to add a human piece to this puzzle.
Faculty and instructors must also rely on the facilitators’ knowledge of their students and
of the program goals. Since facilitators have all been successful graduates of the University
of Cincinnati Educational Leadership program, they know the program intimately; maybe
more so than a faculty member, since they have experienced both sides and the middle of this
instruction. The best changes to the delivery in coursework have come from suggestions
made by the facilitators, who interact between the instructor and the student. The faculty
member and facilitator must become a “team of instructors” and the faculty member must
learn to rely on the facilitator. Facilitators know the students better than the faculty member.