Abstract:

The creation of the Pedagogical Variation Model (PVM, Rogers 2013) is underpinned by the research assumption that teachers/trainers/coaches exhibit certain qualities, e.g. knowledge of online learning technologies, expertise in using computer-mediated communication skills, creative problem-solving, socializing, and online sharing and collaborating with others (Avolio, Sosik, Kahai, & Baker, 2014). Garrison (2011), in his proposed framework for learning in the 21st century, noted the absent notion of pedagogical leadership, since “the teacher’s scholarly leadership ... a legitimate and important authoritative, essential teaching responsibility has been either ignored or downgraded, in online learning environments” (p.70). Consequently, Rogers addressed this problematic gap in knowledge on pedagogical leadership in teaching, developing a model for teachers, based on teachers’ leadership qualities (Rogers, 2004, 2005/2011).

Researchers Avolio, Bass and Jung (1999) provide significant insight to leadership relating to two conceptual frameworks namely:
(i) transactional leadership and
(ii) transformational leadership.

This led Rogers (2004) to initially investigate teacher perceptions of their online role through a leadership paradigm lens It became evident that some teachers regarded transactional (task-giving) leadership more important than transformational (empowering/ motivating) leadership whilst others preferred to focus more on transformational leadership. In addition, there were others that found equal importance in both styles of leadership i.e. transactional and transformational (Cob, 2018). MacDonald (2002, p.211) shows how a 2 x 2 Matrix Format allows researchers to identify two variables, one on the horizontal axis and the other on a vertical axis, thereby forming four quadrants, such that each quadrant symbolises a certain feature, i.e. known as the Boston Matrix. Hence, Rogers (2013) conceptualized the PVM relating to both:
(i) teacher perceptions of their online roles based on a leadership paradigm and
(ii) learner perceptions regarding variables such as collaborative capability and online knowledge construction ability in two Boston Matrix formats,
(i) Teaching Aspect and
(ii) Learner Aspect, such that when merged the ‘matching’ of the equivalent quadrants from the teacher matrix with those of the learner matrix becomes the central aim in the evaluation of the PVM.

A sample population of pre-service teacher undergraduates, at Federal Institute of Education, Science and Technology of Rio Grande do Sul (IFRS), Brazil, participated in Part A and Part B of the PVM evaluation questionnaire (Rogers 2013) during a remote class about implementing ICT by Associate Professor Aline Grunewald Nichele, for teaching and learning of Natural Sciences, namely Chemistry and Biology at IFRS in October 2025. Findings resulted showing how teacher-led motivation together with student motivation and engagement brings about learning opportunities (Somekh, 2007; Kali, McKenney, and Sagy,2015), emphasizing, how teachers become designers of technology enhanced learning (TaD of TEL),developing a focus in discovering how student motivation and online collaboration may be increased as illustrated in the Pedagogical Variation Model (PVM, 2013).Consequently, the PVM (Rogers 2013) paves the way in managing the decrease in online attrition (drop-out) rates, thereby supporting the increase in online retention rates, by matching teaching and learner styles

Keywords:

Leadership Style, Transactional, Transformational, Collaborative Learning, Knowledge Construction, Technology Enhanced Learning, Pedagogical Variation Model, pre-service teacher education, retention rates, attrition rates, conceptual frameworks, Boston Matrix.