Relationship between Faculty Leadership Style and Student Satisfaction in Online Education Courses

1. Is there a relationship between faculty leadership style and student satisfaction in online education courses? By: Florelisa Gonzalez-Severino

2. Introduction

3. Background lpntobsnonline.org

4. Background The graph below shows the number of undergraduate distance education enrollments steadily increases its proportion starting at 16% in 2003-04 and increasing to 32% in 2011-12 (U.S. Department of Education, 2015)

5. Background Higher percentage of graduate students than of undergraduate students took their entire degree program through distance education (18 vs. 6 percent) in 2011-12 (U.S. Department of Education, 2015)

6. Statement of the Problem • Majority of education research relating to student engagement is in the context of the classroom. • While online education is on the rise, it is vital to understand the impact distance learning and the instructor’s leadership style has on students’ satisfaction. • Become aware of those factors that contribute to a student’s positive perception of online courses.

7. Transformational Leadership: Workplace vs. School (Balwant, 2016) (Bass & Avolio, 1994)

8. Transformational Leadership: Workplace vs. School (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Balwant, 2016)

9. (Bass & Avolio, 1994; Balwant, 2016)

10. Purpose of the Study Examine the relationship between student’s perception of online faculty leadership style as measured by the Multifactor Leadership Questionnaire (MLQ) and student satisfaction in online education courses as measured by Students’ Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ)

11. Conceptual Definitions

12. Conceptual Definitions • Student Satisfaction: • the favorability of a student’s subjective evaluation of the various outcomes and experiences associated with education • (Elliott & Shin, 2002)

13. Conceptual Definitions • Distance Education: • Refers to a process to create and provide access to learning when the source of information and the learners are separated by time and distance, or both • Online Course: • Courses that are designed for internet delivery rather than for physical attendance • (Macon, 2011; Miller & Honeyman, 1993; Feenberg, 1999)

14. Conceptual Definitions • Leadership: • a process whereby an individual influences a group of individuals to achieve a common goal • (Northouse, 2010)

15. Dimensions Measured (6) Scales from MLQ: (4) Scales from SEEQ: Learning/Value Enthusiasm Individual Rapport Organization Transformational Leadership: • Idealized Influence (Behavioral) • Inspirational Motivation • Intellectual Stimulation • Individual Consideration Transactional Leadership: • Contingent Reward Passive-Avoidant Leadership: • MBE-Passive

16. Conceptual Definitions: Full Range Leadership • Measured by the MLQ • Transformational Leadership: • Involves a leader-follower exchange relationship in which the followers feel trust, loyalty, and respect toward the leader, and are motivated to do more than originally expected • Transactional Leadership: • Leader-follower exchange relationship in which the follower receives some reward related to lower-order needs in return for compliance with the leader’s expectations • Passive-Avoidant Leadership: • Involves a leader taking corrective action when problems arise (Bass, 1985)

17. Conceptual Definition: Idealized Influence (Behavioral) • Measured using the MLQ • a facet of transformational leadership, which describes leaders who can be counted on to do the right thing through high ethical and moral standards (Bass, 1999)

18. Conceptual Definition: Inspirational Motivation • Measured using the MLQ • behavior facet of transformational leadership, which describes leaders who motivate and inspire followers to commit to the vision of the organization (Avolio, 1999)

19. Conceptual Definition: Intellectual Stimulation • Measured using the MLQ • a behavior facet of transformational leadership, which describes leaders who encourage innovation and creativity through challenging the normal beliefs or views of their followers (Avolio, 1999)

20. Conceptual Definition: Individual Consideration • Measured using the MLQ • a behavior facet of transformational leadership, which describe leaders who act as coaches, facilitators, teachers, and mentors to their followers (Avolio, 1999)

21. Conceptual Definition: Contingent Reward • Measured using the MLQ • a behavior facet of transactional leadership, which describes leaders who engage in a constructive path-goal transaction of reward for performance (Bass, 1985)

22. Conceptual Definition: Management-by-exception (Passive) • Measured using the MLQ • describes leaders who fail to intervene until problems become serious (Bass, 1985)

23. Conceptual Definition: Learning/Value • Measured using the Students’ Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ) • Student’s satisfaction with learning/value (Lawall, 2006)

24. Conceptual Definition: Enthusiasm • Measured using the Students’ Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ) • Student’s assessment of the Instructor’s enthusiasm (Lawall, 2006)

25. Conceptual Definition: Individual Rapport • Measured using the Students’ Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ) • Student’s assessment of individual rapport with Instructor (Lawall, 2006)

26. Conceptual Definition: Organization • Measured using the Students’ Evaluation of Educational Quality (SEEQ) • Student’s assessment of the Instructor’s organization (Lawall, 2006)

27. Independent Variables • Idealized Influence (behavioral) • Intellectual Stimulation • Individual Consideration • Inspirational Motivation • Contingent Reward • Management by Exception – Passive

28. Dependent Variables • Student’s satisfaction with Learning/value • Student’s assessment of the Instructor’s Enthusiasm • Student’s assessment of the Instructor’s Individual Rapport • Student’s assessment of the Instructor’s Organization

29. Control Variables • Student’s Gender • Student’s Age • Student’s Ethnicity • Student’s Educational Classification • Student’s Job Status • Student’s Expected Academic Outcome • Student’s Familiarity with Online Courses

30. Research Areas • Predictors of Student Satisfaction • Predictors of Leadership Ratings of Professor

31. Research Area 1 • Predictors of Student Satisfaction

32. Research Questions

33. Research Question (RQ1) • Is there a relationship betweenonline faculty leadership style (idealized influence-behavioral,intellectual stimulation, individual consideration, inspirational motivation, contingent reward and management-by-exception passive) and student’s satisfaction of learningwhen controlling for student’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, and familiarity with online courses?

34. Research Question (RQ2) • Is there a relationship betweenonline faculty leadership style (idealized influence-behavioral,intellectual stimulation, individual consideration, inspirational motivation, contingent reward and management-by-exception passive) and student’s assessment of the instructor’s enthusiasm and availabilitywhen controlling for student’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, and familiarity with online courses?

35. Research Question (RQ3) • Is there a relationship betweenonline faculty leadership style (idealized influence-behavioral,intellectual stimulation, individual consideration, inspirational motivation, contingent reward and management-by-exception passive) and student’s assessment of the instructor’s enthusiasm and welcoming behaviors when controlling for student’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, and familiarity with online courses?

36. Research Question (RQ4) • Is there a relationship betweenonline faculty leadership style (idealized influence-behavioral,intellectual stimulation, individual consideration, inspirational motivation, contingent reward and management-by-exception passive) and student’s assessment of the instructor’s organizationwhen controlling for student’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, and familiarity with online courses?

37. Research Area 2 • Predictors of Leadership Ratings of Professor

38. Research Question (RQ5) • Is there a relationship betweenstudent’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, familiarity with online courses andrating of student’s perception of professor’s use of idealized influence-behavioral?

39. Research Question (RQ6) • Is there a relationship betweenstudent’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, familiarity with online courses andrating of student’s perception of professor’s use of intellectual stimulation?

40. Research Question (RQ7) • Is there a relationship betweenstudent’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, familiarity with online courses andrating of student’s perception of professor’s use of inspirational motivation?

41. Research Question (RQ8) • Is there a relationship betweenstudent’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, familiarity with online courses andrating of student’s perception of professor’s use of individual consideration?

42. Research Question (RQ9) • Is there a relationship betweenstudent’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, familiarity with online courses andrating of student’s perception of professor’s use of contingent reward?

43. Research Question (RQ10) • Is there a relationship betweenstudent’s gender, age, ethnicity, educational classification, job status, expected academic outcome, familiarity with online courses andrating of student’s perception of professor’s use of management-by-exception passive?

44. Review of Literature

45. Literature Review • Overall student satisfaction • Distance Education vs. Traditional classroom • SEEQ Components • Control Variables

46. Meta-Analysis • Distance education vs. traditional classroom • Student Satisfaction • Student Achievement • Retention Outcomes • Learning Outcomes

47. Research on Distance Education:Student Satisfaction Differences No Differences No difference in student satisfaction for business courses for distance education vs. traditional classroom (k = 20, Hedges g = .20, p = .397) No difference for graduate courses in satisfaction between traditional courses and distance education courses (k = 14, Hedges g = -.21, p = .237) • Student satisfaction was higher for traditional classroom courses than for distance education (k = 59, Hedges g = .22, p = .037) • Students were more satisfied with traditional statistics courses than distance education (k = 20, Hedges g = .44, p = .021) • Students in undergraduate classes were more satisfied with traditional courses than with distance education courses (k = 45, Hedges g = .36, p = .003) Positive Hedges g indicates traditional higher than distance education. Negative Hedges g indicates distance education higher than traditional. (Macon et al., 2011)

48. Research on Distance Education:Student Achievement • Meta-analysis looking at distance education vs. traditional classroom found: • For student achievement, a very small effect size in favor of distance education (k = 318, N = 54,775, g = .01) • Student’s taught synchronously achieved more in traditional classrooms, (k = 92, N = 8,677, g = -.10) • Students taught asynchronously achieved more in distance education courses, (k = 174, N = 36,531, g = .05) Positive g indicates distance education higher than traditional. Negative g indicates traditional classroom higher than distance education. (Bernard et al., 2004)

49. Research on Distance Education:Retention Outcomes • Meta-analysis looking at distance education vs. traditional classroom found: • For retention outcomes, a very small but significant effect was found in favor of classroom instruction (k = 103, N = 3,735,050, g = -.05) Positive g indicates distance education higher than traditional. Negative g indicates traditional classroom higher than distance education. (Bernard et al., 2004)

50. Research on Distance Education:Learning Outcomes • Overall finding of the meta-analysis is that online learning (the combination of studies of purely online and of blended learning) on average produces stronger student learning outcomes than learning solely through face-to-face instruction (k = 50, d = .20, p < .001) • No difference found in student learning outcomes for purely online versus face-to-face instruction (k = 27, g = .05, p = .46) • Blended versus face-to-face is significantly different (k = 23, g = .35, p < .0001), with blended learning producing stronger student learning outcomes than purely face-to-face instruction Positive d indicates online and blended higher than face to face. Positive g indicates blended higher than face to face. (Means et al., 2013)