Transcript Systemic Innovation in Education and Innovative Learning Environments Tracey Burns and David Istance 18 November 2008 Bonn, Germany.

Systemic Innovation in Education
and
Innovative Learning Environments
Tracey Burns and David Istance
18 November 2008
Bonn, Germany
1
Systemic Innovation in VET
Project objectives
 Conceptualize innovation in education

Focus on processes and dynamics of innovation in
education (KM perspective):
– Factors influencing innovation
– A model of innovation

Innovation strategies
– Role of evidence
– Monitoring and evaluating innovation
– Measuring innovation
2
Innovation

“the implementation of a new or significantly
improved product (good or service), or process, a
new marketing method, or a new organisational
method in business practices, workplace organisation
or external relations”
»Oslo manual (2005,
OECD/Eurostat)
3
Systemic Innovation in VET

“Systemic innovation in VET is change that is
introduced with the aim of improving the operation of
VET systems, their performance, the perceived
satisfaction of the main stakeholders, or all of them at
the same time.”
4
Focus of the analysis

profile of innovation

use of an evidence base to support innovation

process and dynamics of innovation

role of evaluation in innovation
5
Identification of needs
 What are the drivers of change?
Evaluation
Development of the innovation
 Which stakeholders are involved?
= judgement of outcomesIdentification
 top-down vs. bottom-up approach
of needs base
Knowledge
Output of the innovation
Development
 which stakeholders
are involved?
How and when is evaluation conducted?
of innovation
Evaluation
Product
Central role: interaction with different stages
 What criteria are used?
What types of knowledge?  Process
Monitoring
 What are the findings?
 Tacit
knowledge Marketing method
Knowledge
base
Output
= continuous surveillance of progress
 Explicit knowledge
 Organisational method
Implementation process
What
knowledge sources?
Monitoring
How is
monitoring conducted?
Outcomes
 Without piloting:Implementation
large-scale implementation
 What criteria are used?
 With piloting:
= impacts or consequences of the innovation
1. Small-scale implementation
 Summative or formative purpose?
Outcomes
2. Monitoring/evaluation
Is
there
an
‘implementation
gap’?
 What are the findings?
6
3. Scaling-up
Case studies






Australia: Increasing the status of VET;
FLAG; Evidence base for VET
Denmark: Globalisation Council; Practical
training
Hungary: Modular National Qualification
Register; Step one forward
Germany: Innovation Circle; SKOLA
Mexico: Tech Bac Reform; Linking public
and private resources
Switzerland: Case Management; Leading
Houses, Basic Commercial Training
7
Preliminary findings
Drivers:




Economic (e.g. Need to improve competitiveness,
increase efficiency of public funding, globalisation
and rise of new skill needs, etc)
Social (e.g. provide a solution for school leavers,
drop-outs, students not taken care within the previous
VET system)
Political (e.g. Need for a political move/success)
Technological (e.g. new technology, etc)
8
Preliminary findings
Barriers:


Accountability mechanisms that radically restrict risk
Competing policy agendas
– Horizontal and vertical cooperation
– Timing

Lack of consensus among stakeholders
– Ownership
– Uptake and implementation
– Resistance to change/fatigue

Lack of research evidence and consistent evaluation
– Timing/policy cycles
– Blue sky research
9
Publication (mid 2009)




A framework report on systemic innovation in
education (concepts, mechanisms, influencing
factors).
A typology of systemic innovation in VET (case
studies).
A benchmarking report on good practice (emphasis
on use of evidence for innovation policies).
Lessons learned and recommendations from intercountry comparisons.
10
OECD-CERI
Innovative
Learning Environments
David Istance
Bad Honnef
18th November 2008
11
Where does it come from?




Grown out of long-running CERI reflections
on ‘Schooling for Tomorrow’
A strong focus on the organisation of
learning, rather than the institutional variables
of educational reform
Focus on research and on concrete
innovations (and less on futures thinking)
Examples must be relevant for school-age
learners – not the whole lifelong learning
range
12
Innovative Learning Environments
Project
•
•
Exploratory Phase with Mexico
“Innovating to Learn, Learning to Innovate”
report (November 2008), another in pipeline
•
Three strands: i) Analytical, ii) Empirical , and
iii) Policy
•
Open to countries, regions & other partners
(foundations, business communities, cultural
groups), including individual ILEs
13
Analytical Strand – new publication
Syntheses of research findings from leading experts
Each chapter will address:
1. How do students learn optimally?
2. How can teachers provide a favourable learning
environment for learning?
1 The Historical Developments in the Conception of Learning
Eric De Corte, Leuven University
2 Developmental and Biological Bases of Learning
Kurt Fischer, Harvard University
3 The Cognitive Perspective on Learning
Lauren Resnick (to be confirmed)
4
14
Analytical Strand: Publication (cont.)







4. Emotional and Motivational Aspects of Learning
Monique Boekaerts, Leiden University
5 Technology and Learning
Richard Mayer, University of California
6 Learning about real-world Problems
Brigid Barron, Stanford University
7 Assessment for Learning
Dylan Wiliam, University of London
8 Learning in Social Groups
Robert Slavin, John Hopkins University
9 The Role of the Family in Learning
Barbara Schneider, Michigan State University
10 The Community as a Resource for Learning
Andrew Furco, University of Minnesota
15




Learning
Environments
Micro-level – teaching and learning in context – not
schools per se (collections of learning environments)
May be found in schools or in other settings
Multi-site (not single classes or individuals)
Concrete examples, not just theoretical (but may be
underpinned by formalised approaches to teaching and
learning)
16
Innovative Learning Environments (for
OECD/CERI project) are:
Departures from the traditional approach of most general or
vocational education to respond better to learning needs – they
are innovative
They serve the learning needs of children and/or adolescents (319 years), exclusively or with others
Seek to provide optimal learning and development in cognitive,
meta-cognitive and socio-emotional terms, whatever the
curriculum focus
Aim at a broad set of learning and educational needs, not very
specific types of knowledge and capabilities
17
Empirical Strand
A universe of ILEs from as many countries as
possible (200-400), recorded to standard format

• An Inventory 40-50
• Observatory with 10 -
cases, looking at the
conditions under which
ILEs get started,
develop, & are made
sustainable (2009)
12 cases representing
different types of ILE,
“thick” in-depth case
studies on learning
process in context
(2009- 2010)
18


One important avenue is “research-based
innovation”…
“There are innovations in education, but neither the
profession nor the public at large looks to research to
produce them. Instead, they are expected to come from
imaginative practitioners and from outside sources such
as technology companies…
“’Research-based innovation’ is research aimed at
creating innovation. The criterion is fruitfulness – does
the idea have potential? Is it worth developing further? It
depends crucially on understanding the nature of the
problem”.
Carl Bereiter and Marlene Scardamalia in Innovating to Learn,
Learning to Innovate, OECD/CERI, 2008
19
…while protecting the public dimension of
educational knowledge and application

“A possible outcome would be the emergence of
‘educational tool companies’ at the interface between
public educational research and schools. These
companies would heavily rely on patenting
educational methods in order to generate income by
granting licenses to schools.”
(Innovation in the Knowledge Economy: Implications
for Education and Learning, OECD/CERI 2004:
89)
20