SpringerLink
Log in

Transparency in Governing Technology Enhanced Learning

  • Living reference work entry
  • First Online:
Technology-Enhanced Learning and the Virtual University

Part of the book series: University Development and Administration ((UDAA))

  • 41 Accesses

Abstract

In this chapter, we first explore the growth of information and communication technologies in education, promoting technology enhanced learning (TEL). We appraise the impact of COVID-19 on higher education before exploring the concept of a virtual organization and virtual higher education. We discuss our collective lived experience in develo** and working in a virtual higher education institution (Virtual University). We explore a crucial concept in the governance of any institution, transparency, before turning to a discussion of higher education in a post-COVID world. We conclude with a clear statement of the central roles of transparency, delegations, policy and process, and formal and informal structures in good governance of virtual and conventional HEIs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AICD. 2019. Not-for-profit governance principles. Australian Institute of Company Directors.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkinshaw, J., and D. Cable. 2017. The dark side of transparency. McKinsey Quarterly 1–7.

    Google Scholar 

  • Burns, T., and G.M. Stalker. 1961. The management of innovation. Tavistock.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C.M., M.B. Horn, L. Caldera, and L. Soares. 2011a. Disrupting college. How disruptive innovation can deliver quality and affordability to postsecondary education. Centre for American Progress.

    Google Scholar 

  • Christensen, C.M., M.B. Horn, and W. Johnson. 2011b. Disrupting class: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. 2nd (Kindle) ed. McGraw Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Cremer, D. 2016. When transparency backfires, and how to prevent it. Harvard Business Review, Digital article. https://hbr.org/2016/07/when-transparency-backfires-and-how-to-prevent-it

  • Fitriani, S., and H. Muljono. 2019. Beyond good governance: An ultimate key success for higher education quality. Journal of Education, Teaching, and Learning 4 (1): 210–216. https://doi.org/10.26737/jetl.v4i1.321.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Galloway, S. 2020. Post corona: From crisis to opportunity. Bantam Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Govindarajan, V., and A. Srivastava. 2020. What the shift to virtual learning could mean for the future of higher ed. Harvard Business Review. Govindarajan and Srivastava is an electronic article from the HBD log dated March 31 2020.

    Google Scholar 

  • Graham, J., A. Bruce, and T. Plumptre. 2003. Principles for good governance in the 21st century. Vol. 15. Institute On Governance.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hanson, M. 2021. Online education statistics. www.education.org, accessed 19 July 2021.

  • Hernes, T. 2008. Understanding organisation as process: Theory for a tangled world. Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2014. A process theory of organisation. Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hofmann, Y.E., and M. Strobel. 2020. Transparency goes a long way: Information transparency and its effect on job satisfaction and turnover intentions of the professoriate. Journal of Business Economics 90 (5–6): 713–732. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11573-020-00984-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hood, C. 2007. What happens when transparency meets blame-avoidance? Public Management Review 9 (2): 191–210. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719030701340275.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kaplan, A.M., and M. Haenlein. 2016. Higher education and the digital revolution: About MOOCs, SPOCs, social media, and the Cookie Monster. Business Horizons 59 (4): 441–450.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Köhler, T., C. Lattemann, and J. Neumann. 2021. Organising academia online. In E-science: Open, social and virtual technology for research collaboration, ed. C. Koschtial, T. Köhler, and C. Felden, 11–28. Springer International Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-66262-2_2.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A. 2007. Process thinking in strategic organisation. Strategic Organisation 5 (3): 271–282.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Langley, A., A.H. Van de Ven, C. Smallman, and H. Tsoukas. 2013. Process studies of change in organisation and management: Unveiling temporality, activity and flow. Academy of Management Journal 56 (2): 1–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Latour, B. 1987. Science in action. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawrence, P.R., and J.W. Lorsch. 1967. Organisation and environment: Managing differentiation and integration. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luhmann, N. 1978/2018. Organisation and decision. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1995. Social systems. Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J.G. 1988. Decisions and organisations. Basil Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1994. A primer on decision making: How decisions happen. Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • March, J.G., and H.A. Simon. 1958. Organisations. Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1993. Organisations. 2nd ed. Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morgan, G. 2006. Images of organisation. 2nd ed. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pennings, J.M. 1975. The relevance of the structural-contingency model for organisational effectiveness. Administrative Science Quarterly 20 (3): 393–410.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Richards, G. 2015. A guide to virtual universities for policy-makers. The Commonwealth of Learning. Available from: http://oasis.col.org/handle/11599/1723

  • Rowan-Kenyon, H.T., A.M. Martínez Alemán, K. Gin, B. Blakeley, A. Gismondi, J. Lewis, A. McCready, D. Zepp, and S. Knight. 2016. Social media in higher education. ASHE Higher Education Report 42 (5): 7–128. https://doi.org/10.1002/aehe.20103.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sine, W.D., M. Hitoshi, and D. Kirsch. 2006. Revisiting Burns and Stalker: Formal structure and new venture performance in emerging economic sectors. Academy of Management Journal 49: 121–132.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Thompson, J.D. 1967. Organisations in action: Social science bases of administrative theory. McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tsoukas, H., and R. Chia. 2002. On organisational becoming – Rethinking organisational change. Organisation Science 13: 567–582.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Turkle, S. 1997. Life on the screen: Identity in the age of the internet. Simon & Shuster.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. The second self: Computers and the human Spirit. 20th Anniversary ed. MIT Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2015. Reclaiming conversation: The power of talk in a digital age. Penguin.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2017. Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. 3rd ed. Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • UNDP. 1997. Governance for sustainable human development–A UNDP policy document. United Nations Development Programme.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weick, K.E. 1993. Sensemaking in organisations: Small structures with large consequences. In Social psychology in organisations: Advances in theory and research, ed. J.K. Murnigham. Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1995. Sensemaking in organisations. Sage Publications.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2001. Making sense of the organisation. Blackwell.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weller, C. 2016. A top futurist predicts the largest internet company of 2030 will be an online school. Business Insider Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. 1998. Communities of practice: Learning, meaning, and identity. Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Wenmoth, D., H. Gilmore, and A. Trewern 2004. Towards a professional community of inquiry. A report to the Ministry of Education on the T4T4T pilot. Core Education Limited.

    Google Scholar 

  • Whitehead, A.N. 1929/1978. Process and reality. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Kingsford Institute of Higher Education, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Clive Smallman

  2. Consult Ed, Sydney, NSW, Australia

    Peter Ryan

Authors
  1. Clive Smallman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Peter Ryan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Clive Smallman .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Charles Darwin University, Darwin, NT, Australia

    Michael David Sankey

  2. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, QLD, Australia

    Henk Huijser

  3. University of Queensland, St. Lucia, QLD, Australia

    Rachel Fitzgerald

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this entry

Smallman, C., Ryan, P. (2023). Transparency in Governing Technology Enhanced Learning. In: Sankey, M.D., Huijser, H., Fitzgerald, R. (eds) Technology-Enhanced Learning and the Virtual University. University Development and Administration. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9438-8_3-1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-19-9438-8_3-1

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore

  • Print ISBN: 978-981-19-9438-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-981-19-9438-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Reference EducationReference Module Humanities and Social SciencesReference Module Education

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation