The rise and fall of camelot: designing, implementing, and dismantling  (Page 16/16)

An additional related point is the necessity of securing support from the hierarchy for any program that is unique. This is especially true of online programs, which administrators often have less experience with and which they may view as cost-saving programs. A unique program often requires special resources and has the potential to cause more work for administrators as pushing the envelope often means that someone will be unhappy and complain higher up the line, whether that someone be a student, faculty member, or someone else. For example, our program requires faculty who are collaborative and willing to let go of some of their own specific desires in order to fulfill the program mission. We also need faculty with a unique blend of abilities. They must be strong online teachers who believe in experiential learning, be willing to work in a professional learning community, and should have strong scholarly interests that can support both program improvement and dissemination of our successes. Failure by the hierarchy to appreciate these needs leads to the hiring of faculty who cannot fulfill the program needs. Examples of other items we needed support on include the extra cost of The Hickory Experience , cost of travel for making intern site visits, appeals of non-admitted applicants, and appeals of participants dismissed for poor performance.

Relationships

Establishing a strong professional learning community is critical, especially for an online program. What we were able to achieve was the result of consistent and concerted work in a positive and supportive environment. The highs and the lows of the program seem to me to directly correspond with the robustness of our PLC, which in turn is a reflection of the strengths of multiple individual relationships. The PLC also helped to keep faculty in physical contact with each other. Physical proximity allowed for spontaneous professional and personal conversations that were less likely to occur when faculty were away form each other. These conversations helped maintain relationships. When the PLC was strong, the program was strong, and when relationships fractured, so did the program. In retrospect, we needed to revisit our norms more frequently. We also needed to be more willing to respectfully raise concerns about behaviors that interfered with the PLC and to be able to move programmatic concerns temporarily to a back burner in order to tend to relationships. Under the two years of constant changes, it seemed that faculty members withdrew from the university, physically and emotionally. This withdraw weakened the PLC, just at the time when we most needed each other.

Epilogue

I hope this story has offered rich opportunities for reflection. For me, writing this story has been a cathartic experience. Only now, through this process, have I been able to gain needed perspectives and to come to terms with the inevitability of our own and each other’s human strengths and weaknesses. Although I still carry a deep sense of loss, I believe I am better for having participated in our endeavor. As Tennyson (1850) so eloquently stated, “’Tis better to have loved and lost, than never to have loved at all” (line 27). Picking up the pieces is difficult, but a failure to confront my own sense of loss would leave me stuck and scarred. I have slowly worked out of the fall by consciously engaging in personal renewal, of which this story is a part. I have concluded that even now, the program we have is better than the one we inherited five years ago. I still control my own power to teach. I can still make a difference in the classroom, virtual or otherwise.

Finally, I will begin looking for another Camelot, another round table, another dream. I don’t believe that the quest is the most important part of the tale, but once you have seen the grail, it is almost impossible to not desire to see it again.

References

• Brook, C.,&Oliver, R. (2003). Online learning communities: Investigating a design framework . Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 19 (2), 139-160.
• Buskey, F. C.,&Topolka-Jorissen, K. (2010). No more silos: A new vision for principal preparation . Educational Leadership Review , 11 (2), 112-122.
• Collins, J.,&Porras, J. (1996). Building your company's vision. Harvard Business Review , 74 (5), 65–77.
• DuFour, R.,&Eaker, R. (1998). Professional learning communities at work: Best practices for enhancing student achievement . Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
• Hord, S. M. (1997). Professional learning communities: Communities of continuous inquiry and improvement . Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Lab. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED410659).
• Jacobs, J., Buskey, F., Topolka-Jorissen, K., Szlizewski, L.&Allen, A. (2010). Creating program transformation through a mantra. International Journal of Educational Leadership Preparation, 5 (2). Retrieved from (External Link)
• Nash, R. J.,&Bradley, D. L. (2011). Me-search and re-search: A guide for writing scholarly personal narrative manuscripts. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
• Tennyson, A. (1850). In Memorium A. H. H . Retrieved from (External Link)
• Tuckman, B. (1965). Developmental sequence in small groups.  Psychological Bulletin,   63 (6), 384-399. doi: 10.1037/h0022100