The Distance Learning Leader: What You Don’t Know Could Hurt You

In many ways, it is the best and worst of times for distance learning (DL) programs. It is estimated the e-learning sector will grow to $83.1 billion by 2006, eventually swelling to over $212 billion by 2011 (Greenspan, 2003). This is evidenced by the meteoric rise of such DL pioneers as the University of Phoenix, as the nation’s largest private university, with close to 100,000 students scattered among 134 satellite locations across 28 states. Unfortunately, the increased growth and popularity of DL programs is not without risks, as reflected by abandoned university online ventures such as E-Cornell, Virtual Temple, NYU Online, Fathom, E-MBA, and California Virtual University. Despite these risks, the growing widespread acceptance of DL programs by the public, argues for the continued development of this facet of collegiate level instruction (Edelson, 2002).

In order to succeed in this new environment, organizations must continually acquire new skills and new ways of managing knowledge and information; this requires DL leaders to be entrepreneurial while navigating the risks of new educational technology. DL leaders must go beyond distance education (DE) technology to develop their vision, strategy, and business plan to guide their organization into the age of e-learning.

John Flores, Executive Director of the United States Distance Learning Association (USDLA), recognized the need for leadership capacity building in DL and engaged Nova Southeastern University’s Fis-chler School of Education and Human Services to create a competency-based leadership program for DL leaders. The purpose of this article is to describe a needs analysis developed to identify the duties and responsibilities of DL leaders and a Distance Learning Leadership Certificate Program developed to address these competencies.

It could be argued that the most important ingredient for a successful DL program is the vision and approach developed by the DL leader and how well this approach aligns to the organizational strategy. Meister (2002) posited that one of the pillars of e-learning success is for corporate learning practitioners to ensure that their staffs have the necessary e-learning skills and competencies. Edelson (2002) supported this notion when he suggested that the success of higher education institutions in the e-learning world is based on their infusion of DE leadership strategies such as creating a vision and embracing an entrepreneurial organizational spirit. Likewise, the Commission on Technology and Adult Learning (2001) recommended that, in order to succeed in the e-learning arena, individuals and organizations must continually acquire new skills and ways of managing knowledge and information. Despite this, Thach

(1994) recognized the scant attention given to research on DL competencies, let alone research targeted to DL leaders. It is surprising then, given the importance of leadership to the success of DL programs, how little research and programs exists to build leadership capacity. Williams (2003) noted institutions implementing DE programs would benefit from research defining necessary roles and competencies. Limiting his research to higher education, Williams utilized a Delphi study to identify 13 distinct roles and competencies to manage DE. In his study, the role of the leader/change agent emerged separate from the administrative manager role. Building on the foundation established by Williams, the rationale for the current study was based on the need to further identify skills and competencies of DL leaders in higher education.

This study used the DACUM process, a quick, cost-efficient job analysis method used to identify DL leader competencies that “expert workers” believe are essential for performing a specific job or occupation. Initially, a focus group was conducted with six DL leaders representing both corporate and higher education settings. The criteria for expert workers included a self-rating of level of expertise as a DL leader, five or more years of experience, and current employment (in some capacity) as a DL leader. The group defined a DL leader as “responsible for leading the distance learning/e-learning initiative in their organization.” The DL Leader Job Model was then validated by 27 DL leaders who were members of the United States Distance Learning Association (USDLA) representing a cross section of K-12, higher education, and corporate settings.

The DL Leader Job Model Online Validation Survey contained 91 questions divided into three sections. Section one asked about demographics and backgrounds of the respondents. Section two included a scale requiring respondents to rate job task importance of a DL leader as well as value of training in major duties and tasks. Similarly, in section three respondents rated specific skill and knowledge competencies of a DL leader.

Of the 27 respondents, 50% had doctorates, 42% had master’s degrees, and 8% had bachelors degrees. Most respondents described their expertise as a DL leader as high or very high. The respondents were employed in Fortune 500 companies, federal government, K-12, financial services, health care, and higher education. Most of the respondents had more than five years experience with ten years experience as the average.

Three questions were addressed in this section:

The DACUM panel identified eight major duties and five skill/ knowledge competency areas for the DL leader (see Table 1). The eight major duties are a combination of leadership and managerial duties including: leading and developing the business, technology, and curriculum strategies, managing the organization, budget, marketing/promoting and managing support services. The five skill/knowledge competencies included the foundational knowledge of DL, learning delivery technologies, tools and learning management technologies, and reiterated DL leadership.

For each of the eight duties, respondents identified from 5 to 12 major tasks (see Table 2).

For each of the skills/knowledge competencies there were three to six domains identified by respondents (See Table 3)

Quantitative methods were employed for questions two and three. For question two, respondents were asked to rank the importance of specific job tasks and training value as related to their role as a DL leader. Similarly, in question three, the importance of specific competencies and training value related to job performance were ranked. Importance levels and training values were ranked on a four-point scale that included, 4 = Critical, 3 = High, 2 = Moderate, and 1 = Low. To clarify terminology, the following definitions were provided to respondents prior to ranking the competencies:

• Competency is an underlying characteristic (knowledge, skills, and traits) of an individual that is causally related to effective performance in a job.

• Knowledge is data, information, or concepts that you have in your head in order to perform the task. This knowledge may be used actively in carrying out the tasks, or could be background information that helps you get started.

• Skills are abilities that you have to be able to demonstrate in performing the task. These differ from knowledge items mainly in that they usually involve doing rather than just knowing.

• Tasks are underlying parts of your personality that are consistent responses to situations and information that task performance relies on (Spencer & Spencer, 1993).

To identify which task and competencies were deemed most important and had the highest training value, Means and Standard Deviations were calculated; results revealed a Mean of 3.1 and Standard Deviation of .3. A task was rated as “most important” if the overall ranking was 3.4 or higher for both importance and value of training.

DL leaders ranked those tasks aligned to executing their DL strategy as the highest and most important tasks (see Table 4), including: implementing DL plans, managing projects, managing the team, and monitoring costs. Leadership behaviors, including ethical modeling, visioning, and innovation, were also ranked high, but lower than “hands-on make it happen” approach. Support and technology integration plans, though critically important to the success of DL programs, were ranked lower. Interestingly, several DL programs have been derailed because of shortcomings in these areas.

The highest-ranked skills and knowledge competencies of DL leaders were related to content, and included: copyright, design, and learner differences. Ranked slightly lower, leadership competencies of developing a vision and championing DL in the organization are also highly valued. The highest-ranked skills and knowledge competencies and training values are presented in Table 5.

With the initial step of defining and validating the Distance Learning Leader Job Model as well as identifying the most important tasks and duties and their associated competencies, Dr. Michael Simonson, Program Professor of Instructional Technology and Distance Education, led a design team to develop an instructional strategy for certification of DL leaders. The team developed the K-D-M-L-V Distance Learning Leader Model to address specific tasks and competencies. This model includes the following five competencies: (1) Knowing, (2) Designing, (3) Managing, (4) Leading, and (5) Visioning. Competencies and outcomes are presented in Table 6 .

The DLLCP is designed for professionals in a wide range of positions including chief learning officers, higher education/university DE directors, training directors and managers, educational technology directors, and teachers who are currently leading or interested in being a leader of DL program.

The program combines two full days of face-to-face instruction and six weeks of part-time distance instruction. Distance instruction includes a six week follow-up delivery to on-site instruction including threaded discussion to review business plans, discussion with DE leaders, audio conferencing, and respondent-led presentations of organization vision and business plans.

In February 2004, 27 USDLA member DL leaders attended the initial pilot in Ft. Lauderdale, Florida. One of the key design considerations for the program was to offer a hybrid design of on-site instruction with online follow-up. This afforded the leaders with an opportunity to network and share ideas across corporate, higher education, and K-12 boundaries. Program benefits of the DL leader certification program recognized by respondents included: cutting-edge DL leadership skills you can use today; ability to communicate DL vision and strategy more effectively; interaction with businesses and higher education leaders with a wide range of perspectives and insights; and ensuring learning technology dollars are invested wisely.

This article described how the DL Leader Certificate Program was developed by identifying the most important competencies leaders of DL need for their programs to be successful. Leading DL programs is not for the faint of heart. We are in the early stages of fully realizing the dramatic paradigm shift DL will have on the way education and training programs are delivered. As of yet, there are no standards for leaders of DL programs, yet it is perhaps the most important success factor. More research needs to be conducted in the important area of identifying duties and responsibilities of DL leaders.