FEMALE ADMINISTRATORS PERCEPTIONS OF DISTANCE LEARNING

Abstract

Gender disparity is evident in tenure track and tenured faculty positions at universities. However, distance education may provide more supportive environments for female academicians to grow and develop. The term distance learning is used to encompass any type of instruction delivered off campus. Distance learning has increased dramatically and has gained strategic importance possibly presenting women with a new realm for advancement. Leaders in distance learning must have qualities such as good listening skills, be understanding, engage in collaboration, be cooperative, demonstrate openness, have interpersonal sensitivity and empathy; attributes traditionally associated with females. This qualitative study utilizing a survey design, asked 21 participants, female administrators in distance education: “What are your perceptions of the role of distance learning in education today?” They perceived the role of distance learning in education today to be of utmost import and discussed the needs of learners, the access of distance learning, value of distance learning, federal and state requirements, the future of distance learning, the significant impact on Higher Education and the improvement needed. 

Keywords

• Online learning
• female administrators
• distance learning
• women
• education

References

1. Arbaugh, J. B. (2000). An exploratory study of the effects of gender on student learning and class participation in an internet-based MBA course. Management Learning, 31(4), 503–519. doi:10.1177/1350507600314006
2. Bilen-Green, C., Froelich, K. A., & Sukalski, K. (2011). Gateways to academic leadership positions, and impact on women in the professorial ranks. Women in Engineering ProActive Network . 1-11.
3. Blum, K. D. (1999). Gender differences in asynchronous learning in higher education:
4. Gopalakrishnan, S. (2012). A Change Model for Implementing Online Learning : Best
5. Practices and Leadership. 28th Annunal Conference on Distance Learning , 1–5. Johnson, R. D. (2011). Gender differences in E-learning. Journal of Organizational and End User Computing, 23(1), 79–94. doi:10.4018/joeuc.2011010105
6. Kark, R., Waismel-Manor, R., & Shamir, B. (2012). Does valuing androgyny and femininity lead to a female advantage? The relationship between gender-role, transformational leadership and identification. The Leadership Quarterly, 23(3), 620-640. doi:1016/j.leaqua.2011.12.012
7. Madsen, S. R. (2012). Women and leadership in higher education: Current realities, challenges, and future directions. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 14(2), 131– doi:10.1177/1523422311436299
8. Murray, N., Tremaine, M., & Fountaine, S. (2012). Breaking through the glass ceiling in the ivory tower: Using a case study to gain new understandings of old gender issues.

9. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 14(2), 221–236. doi:1177/1523422312436418
10. National Science Foundation. (2008). Higher Education in Science and Engineering , 1-8.
11. Perrakis, a., & Martinez, C. (2012). In pursuit of sustainable leadership: How female academic department chairs with children negotiate personal and professional roles.
12. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 14(2), 205–220. doi:1177/1523422312436417
13. Porter, D. B. (2013, March). Distance education planning and implementation strategies: a comparison of faculty perceptions at Pennsylvania state institutions. In Society for
14. Information Technology & Teacher Education International Conference, 3(1), 955-960. The White House Project. (2009, November). The White House project report:
15. Benchmarking women’s leadership. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://thewhitehouseproject. org/documents/Report.pdf Trepte, S. (2006). Social identity. In B. Jennings & P. Vorderer (Eds.), Psychology of
16. Entertainment. New York, NY: Routledge. Vinkenburg, C. J., Van Engen, M. L., Eagly, A. H., & Johannesen-Schmidt, M. C. (2011). An exploration of stereotypical beliefs about leadership styles: Is transformational leadership a route to women’s promotion? The Leadership Quarterly, 22(1), 10–21. doi:1016/j.leaqua.2010.12.003