The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

www.emeraldinsight.com/2397-7604.htm

pp. 4-33
JRIT Emerald Publishing Limited 2397-7604
DOI 10.1108/JRIT-10-2016-0007
10,1
Innovation in
education: what
4
works, what doesn’t,
and
what to do about it?

Peter Serdyukov
National University, La Jolla, California, USA

Abstract
Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to present an
analytical review of the educational innovation field in the
USA. It outlines classification of innovations, discusses the
hurdles to innovation, and offers ways to increase the scale
and rate of innovation-based transformations in the
education system. Design/methodology/approach – The
paper is based on a literature survey and author research.
Findings – US education badly needs effective innovations
of scale that can help produce the needed high-quality
learning outcomes across the system. The primary focus of
educational innovations should be on teaching and learning
theory and practice, as well as on the learner, parents,
community, society, and its culture. Technology applications
need a solid theoretical foundation based on purposeful,
systemic research, and a sound pedagogy. One of the
critical areas of research and innovation can be cost and
time efficiency of the learning.
Practical implications – Several practical recommendations
stem out of this paper: how to create a base for large-scale
innovations and their implementation; how to increase
effectiveness of technology innovations in education,
particularly online learning; how to raise time and cost
efficiency of education. Social implications – Innovations in
Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning education are regarded, along with the education system,
Vol. 10 No. 1, 2017
within the context of a societal supersystem demonstrating in our education system. We then offer
their interrelations and interdependencies at all levels. recommendations for the growth of educational
Raising the quality and scale of innovations in education will
innovations. As examples of innovations in
positively affect education itself and benefit the whole
society. education, we will highlight online learning and
Originality/value – Originality is in the systemic approach to time efficiency of learning using accelerated and
education and educational innovations, in offering a intensive approaches.
comprehensive classification of innovations; in exposing the
hurdles to innovations, in new arguments about
Innovations in US education
effectiveness of technology applications, and in time
efficiency of education. Keywords Implementation, For an individual, a nation, and humankind to
Innovation, Educational technology, Time efficiency Paper survive and progress, innovation and evolution are
type Conceptual paper essential. Innovations in education are of particular
importance because education plays a crucial role
Necessity is the mother of invention (Plato).
in creating a sustainable future. “Innovation
resembles mutation, the biological process that
Introduction keeps species evolving so they can better
Education, being a social institution serving the compete for survival” (Hoffman and Holzhuter,
needs of society, is indispensable for society to 2012, p. 3). Innovation, therefore, is to be regarded
survive and thrive. It should be not only as an instrument of necessary and positive
comprehensive, sustainable, and superb, but must change. Any human activity (e.g. industrial,
continuously evolve to meet the challenges of the business, or educational) needs constant
fast-changing and unpredictable globalized world. innovation to remain sustainable.
This evolution must be systemic, consistent, and The need for educational innovations has become
scalable; therefore, school teachers, college acute. “It is widely believed that countries’ social
professors, administrators, researchers, and policy and economic well-being will depend to an ever
makers are expected to innovate the theory and greater extent on the quality of their citizens’
practice of teaching and learning, as well as all education: the emergence of the so-called
other aspects of this complex organization to ‘knowledge society’, the transformation of
ensure quality preparation of all students to life information and the media, and increasing
and work. specialization on the part of organizations all call
Here we present a systemic discussion of for high skill profiles and levels of knowledge.
educational innovations, identify the barriers to Today’s education systems are required to be both
innovation, and outline potential directions for effective and efficient, or in other words, to reach
effective innovations. We discuss the current the goals set for them while making the best use of
available resources” (Cornali, 2012, p. 255).
According to an Organization for Economic
© Peter Serdyukov. Published in the Journal of Research
Cooperation and Development (OECD) report, “the
in Innovative Teaching & Learning. This article is
published under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC
pressure to increase equity and improve
BY 4.0) licence. Anyone may reproduce, distribute, educational outcomes for students is growing
translate and create derivative works of this article (for around the world” (Vieluf et al., 2012, p. 3). In the
both commercial and non-commercial purposes), subject USA, underlying pressure to innovate comes from
to full attribution to the original publication and authors. political, economic, demographic, and
The full terms of this licence may be seen at technological forces from both inside and outside
http://creativecommons.org/licences/by/4.0/legalcode the nation.
The author would like to thank Drs Robyn Hill, Sara Many in the USA seem to recognize that education
Kelly and Margot Kinberg for their help in preparing at all levels critically needs renewal: “Higher
this paper for publication. education has to change. It needs more
status of innovations in US education, what innovation” (Wildavsky et al., 2012, p. 1). This
educational innovation is, how innovations are message, however, is not new – in the foreword to
being integrated in schools and colleges, why the 1964 book entitled Innovation in Education,
innovations do not always produce the desired Arthur Foshay, Executive Officer of The Horace
effect, and what should be done to increase the Mann-Lincoln Institute of School Experimentation,
scale and rate of innovation-based transformations wrote, “It has become platitudinous to speak of the
winds of change in education, to remind those lackluster education system (Creating innovators,
interested in the educational enterprise that a 2012). Derek Bok, a former Harvard University
revolution is in progress. Trite or not, however, it is President, writes, “[…] neither American students
true to say that changes appear wherever one nor our universities, nor the nation itself, can afford
turns in education” (Matthew, 1964, p. v). to take for granted the quality of higher education
Yet, more than 50 years later, we realize that the and the teaching and learning it provides” (Bok,
actual pace of educational innovations and their 2007, p. 6). Hence it is central for us to make US
implementation is too slow as shown by the education consistently innovative and focus
learning outcomes of both school and college educational innovations on raising the quality of
graduates, which are far from what is needed in learning at all levels. Yet, though there is a good
today’s world. Jim Shelton, Assistant Deputy deal of ongoing educational research and
Secretary of the Office of Innovation and innovation, we have not actually seen discernable
Improvement in the US Department of Education, improvements in either school students’ or college
writes, “Whether for reasons of economic growth, graduates’ achievements to this day. Suffice it to
competitiveness, social justice or return on mention a few facts. Program for International
tax-payer investment, there is little rational Student Assessment (PISA) evaluations keep
argument over the need for significant revealing disappointing results for our middle
improvement in US educational outcomes. Further, school (Pew Research Center, 2015); a large
it is irrefutable that the country has made limited number of high school graduates are not ready for
improvement on most educational outcomes over college (College preparedness, 2012); and
the last several decades, especially when employers, in turn, are often dissatisfied with
considered in the context of the increased college graduates (Thomson, 2015; Jaschik,
investment over the same period. In fact, the total 2015). No one, be they students, parents,
cost of producing each successful high school and academia, business, or society as a whole, are
college graduate has increased substantially over pleased with these outcomes. Could it be that our
time instead of decreasing – creating what some education system is not sufficiently innovative?
argue is an inverted learning curve […].” Danny Crichton, an entrepreneur, in his blog The
“Education not only needs new ideas and Next Wave of Education Innovation writes
inventions that shatter the performance expressly, “Few areas have been as hopeful and
expectations of today’s status quo; to make a as disappointing as innovation in education.
meaningful impact, these new solutions must also Education is probably the single most important
“scale,” that is grow large enough, to serve millions function in our society today, yet it remains one of
of students and teachers or large portions of the least understood, despite incredible levels of
specific underserved populations” (Shelton, 2011). investment from venture capitalists and
Yet, something does not work here. governments. Why do students continue to show
Innovation in education up in a classroom or start an online course? How
do we guide students to the right knowledge just
as they need to learn it? We may have an
empirical inkling and some hunches, but we still
lack any fundamental insights. That is truly
5 disappointing. With the rise of the internet, it
JRIT 10,1 seemed like education was on the cusp of a
complete revolution. Today, though, you would be
excused for not seeing much of a difference
between the way we learn and how we did so
twenty years ago” (Crichton, 2015).
6 Editors of the book Reinventing Higher Education:
Lack of innovation can have profound economic The Promise of Innovation, Ben Wildavsky,
and social repercussions. America’s last Andrew Kelly, and Kevin Carey write, “The higher
competitive advantage, warns Harvard Innovation education system also betrays an innovation deficit
Education Fellow Tony Wagner, its ability to in another way: a steady decline in productivity
innovate, is at risk as a result of the country’s driven by a combination of static or declining
output paired with skyrocketing prices (Wildavsky Theory of Multiple Intelligences, have been
et al., 2012, p. 3). This despairing mood is echoed influential in building the much-admired school
by Groom and Lamb’s statement in EDUCAUSE system in Finland” (Rubin, 2015); so wrote other
Review, “Today, innovation is increasingly authors (Strauss, 2014). Singapore, South Korea,
conflated with hype, disruption for disruption’s China, and other forward-looking countries also
sake, and outsourcing laced with a dose of learned from great US educational ideas.
austerity-driven downsizing” (Groom and Lamb, We cannot say that US educators and society are
2014). oblivious to the problems in education: on the
USA success has always been driven by contrary, a number of educational movements
innovation and has a unique capacity for growth have taken place in recent US history (e.g.
(Zeihan, 2014). Nevertheless, it is indeed a numerous educational reforms since 1957 to this
paradox: while the USA produces more research, day, including recent NCLB, Race to the Top, and
including in education, than any other country the Common Core). Universities and research
(Science Watch, 2009), we do not see much organizations opened centers and laboratories of
improvement in the way our students are prepared innovation (Harvard Innovation Lab, Presidential
for life and work. The USA can be proud of great Innovation Laboratory convened by American
scholars, such as John Dewey, B.F. Skinner, Council on Education, Center for Innovation in
Abraham Maslow, Albert Bandura, Howard Education at the University of Kentucky, NASA
Gardner, Jerome Bruner, and many others who STEM Innovation Lab, and recently created
have contributed a great deal to the theory of National University Center for Innovation in
education. Yet, has this theory yielded any Learning). Some institutions introduced programs
innovative approaches for the teaching and focusing on innovation (Master’s Program in
learning practice that have increased learning Technology, Innovation, and Education at Harvard
productivity and improved the quality of the Graduate School of Education; Master of Arts in
output? Education and Innovation at the Webster
The USA is the home of the computer and the University). New organizations have been set up
internet, but has the information revolution helped (The International Centre for Innovation in
to improve the quality of learning outcomes? Education, Innovative Schools Network, Center for
Where and how, then, are all these educational Education Reform). Regular conferences on the
innovations applied? It seems, write Spangehl and topic are convened (AERA, ASU-GSV Summit,
Hoffman, that “American education has taken little National Conference on Educational Innovation,
advantage of important innovations that would The Nueva School for the Innovative Learning
increase instructional capacity, effectiveness, and Conference). Excellent books have been written by
productivity” (2012, p. 21). “The new ‘job factory’ outstanding innovators such as Andy Hargreaves
role American universities have awkwardly stuffed (2003), Hargreaves and Shirley (2009),
themselves into may be killing the modern college Hargreaves et al. (2010), Michael Fullan (2007,
student’s spirit and search for meaning” (Mercurio, 2010), Yong Zhao (2012), Pasi Sahlberg (2011),
2016). Tony Wagner (2012), Mihaliy Csikszentmihalyi
What is interesting here is that while we are still (2013), and Ken Robinson (2015). There is even
undecided as to what to do with our struggling an Office of Innovation and Improvement in the US
schools and universities and how to integrate into Department of Education, which is intended to “[…]
them our advanced inventions, other nations are drive education innovation by both seeding new
already benefiting from our innovations and have strategies, and bringing proven approaches to
in a short time successfully built world-class scale” (Office of Innovation and Improvement,
education systems. It is ironic that an admirable 2016). And still, innovations do not take hold in
Finnish success was derived heavily from US American classrooms on a wide scale, which may
educational research. Pasi Sahlberg, a Finnish leave the nation behind in global competition.
educator and author of a bestselling book, The Society’s failure to anticipate the problems and
Finnish Lessons: What Can the World Learn from their outcomes may have unpredictable
Educational Change In Finland, said in an consequences, as Pulitzer Prize winner and
interview to the Huffington Post, “American Professor Jared Diamond, University of California,
scholars and their writings, like Howard Gardner’s Los Angeles, writes in his book, Collapse: How
Societies Choose to Fail or Succeed (Diamond, successful introduction of a new thing or method”
2005). Yong Zhao interpreted Diamond’s findings (Brewer and Tierney, 2012, p. 15). In essence,
as “[…] society’s inability to perceive or “[…] innovation seems to have two
unwillingness to accept large and distant changes subcomponents. First, there is the idea or item
– and thus work to come up with the right which is novel to a particular individual or group
response – is among one of the chief reasons that and, second, there is the change which results
societies fail. This inability also leads human from the adoption of the object or idea” (Evans,
beings to look for short-term outcomes and seek 1970, p. 16). Thus, innovation requires three major
immediate gratification” (Zhao, 2012, p. 162). It steps: an idea, its implementation, and the
looks like the issue of educational innovation goes outcome that results from the execution of the idea
beyond the field itself and requires a strong and produces a change. In education, innovation
societal response. can appear as a new pedagogic theory,
Three big questions arise from this discussion: methodological approach, teaching technique,
why, having so many innovators and organizations instructional tool, learning process, or institutional
concerned with innovations, does our education structure that, when implemented, produces a
system not benefit from them? What interferes with significant change in teaching and learning, which
creating and, especially, implementing leads to better student learning. So, innovations in
transformative, life-changing, and much-needed education are intended to raise productivity and
innovations across schools and colleges in this efficiency of learning and/or improve learning
country? How can we grow, support, and quality. For example, Khan’s Academy and
disseminate worthy innovations effectively so that MOOCs have opened new, practically unlimited
our students succeed in both school and university opportunities for massive, more efficient learning.
and achieve the best learning outcomes that will Efficiency is generally determined by the amount
adequately prepare them for life and work? Let us of time, money, and resources that are necessary
first take a look at what is an educational to obtain certain results. In education, efficiency of
innovation. learning is determined mainly by the invested time
Innovation in education and cost. Learning is more efficient if we achieve
the same results in less time and with less
expense. Productivity is determined by estimating
the outcomes obtained vs the invested effort in
order to achieve the result. Thus, if we can achieve
7 more with less effort, productivity increases.
Hence, innovations in education should increase
JRIT 10,1 both productivity of learning and learning
efficiency.
Educational innovations emerge in various areas
and in many forms. According to the US Office of
8 Education, “There are innovations in the way
education systems are organized and managed,
What is educational innovation?
exemplified by charter schools or school
Creativity is thinking up new things. Innovation is doing accountability systems. There are innovations in
new things (Theodore Levitt). instructional techniques or delivery systems, such
To innovate is to look beyond what we are as the use of new technologies in the classroom.
currently doing and develop a novel idea that helps There are innovations in the way teachers are
us to do our job in a new way. The purpose of any recruited, and prepared, and compensated. The
invention, therefore, is to create something list goes on and on” (US Department of Education,
different from what we have been doing, be it in 2004).
quality or quantity or both. To produce a Innovation can be directed toward progress in one,
considerable, transformative effect, the innovation several, or all aspects of the educational system:
must be put to work, which requires prompt theory and practice, curriculum, teaching and
diffusion and large-scale implementation. learning, policy, technology, institutions and
Innovation is generally understood as “[…] the administration, institutional culture, and teacher
education. It can be applied in any aspect of • philosophical (constructivism, objectivism);
education that can make a positive impact on
learning and learners. • cultural (moral education, multiculturalism,

In a similar way, educational innovation concerns bilingual education);

all stakeholders: the learner, parents, teacher, • pedagogical (competence-based education,
educational administrators, researchers, and policy STEM (curriculum choices in school: Science,
makers and requires their active involvement and Technology, English, and Mathematics);
support. When considering the learners, we think
of studying cognitive processes taking place in the • psychological (cognitive science, multiple
the brain during learning – identifying and intelligencies theory, Maslow’s hierarchy of needs,
developing abilities, skills, and competencies. learning style theory); and
These include improving attitudes, dispositions, • technological (computer-based learning,
behaviors, motivation, self-assessment, networked learning, e-learning).
self-efficacy, autonomy, as well as communication, Though these innovations left a significant mark on
collaboration, engagement, and learning education, which of them helped improve
productivity. productivity and quality of learning? Under NCLB,
To raise the quality of teaching, we want to we placed too much focus on accountability and
enhance teacher education, professional assessment and lost sight of many other critical
development, and life-long learning to include aspects of education. In drawing too much
attitudes, dispositions, teaching style, motivation, attention to technology innovations, we may
skills, competencies, self-assessment, neglect teachers and learners in the process.
self-efficacy, creativity, responsibility, autonomy to Stressing the importance of STEM at the expense
teach, capacity to innovate, freedom from of music, arts and physical culture ignores young
administrative pressure, best conditions of work, people’s personal, social, emotional, and moral
and public sustenance. As such, we expect development. Reforming higher education without
educational institutions to provide an optimal reforming secondary education is futile. Trying to
academic change education while leaving disfunctional
environment, as well as materials and conditions societal and cultural mechanisms intact is doomed.
for achieving excellence of the learning outcomes It is crucial, therefore, when innovating to ask,
for every student (program content, course format, “What is this innovation for?” “How will it work?”
institutional culture, research, funding, resources, and “What effect will it produce?”
infrastructure, administration, and support). Many of us educators naively believe grand
Education is nourished by society and, in turn, reforms or powerful technologies will transform our
nourishes society. The national educational system education system. Did we not expect NCLB to
relies on the dedication and responsibility of all change our schools for the better? Did we not
society for its effective functioning, thus parental hope that new information technologies would
involvement, together with strong community and make education more effective and relieve
society backing, are crucial for success. teachers from tedious labor? However, again and
A national education system is commonly the again we realize that neither loud reforms nor
product of a distinctive set of historical, political, wondrous technology will do the hard work
social, cultural, and economic effects. As it is a demanded of teachers and learners.
complete system, its different areas are not only Innovations can be categorized as evolutionary or
interrelated and interdependent but act together. revolutionary (Osolind, 2012), sustaining or
Subsequently, any change in one of them may disruptive (Christensen and Overdorf, 2000; Yu
generate a change in others. A few examples of and Hang, 2010). Evolutionary innovations lead to
innovations in some areas that made a drastic incremental improvement but require continuity;
impact on the whole educational system are: revolutionary innovations bring about a complete
• political (NCLB (No Child Left Behind Act), Race change, totally overhauling and/or replacing the
to the Top); old with the new, often in a short time period.
Sustaining innovation perpetuates the current
• social (Equal Opportunities Act, affirmative action
dimensions of performance (e.g. continuous
policy, Indivuals with Disabilities Education Act);
improvement of the curriculum), while disrupting
innovation, such as a national reform, radically (1) Adjustment or upgrading of the process:
changes the whole field. Innovations can also be innovation can occur in daily performance and be
tangible (e.g. technology tools) and intangible (e.g. seen as a way to make our job easier, more
methods, strategies, and techniques). Evolutionary effective, more appealing, or less stressful. This
and revolutionary innovations seem to have the kind of innovation, however, should be considered
same connotation as sustaining and disruptive an improvement rather than innovation because it
innovations, respectively. does not produce a new method or tool. The term
Innovation in education innovative, in keeping with the dictionary definition,
applies only to something new and different, not
just better, and it must be useful (Okpara, 2007).
Educators, incidentally, commonly apply the term
“innovative” to almost any improvement in
9 classroom practices; yet, to be consistent, not any
JRIT 10,1 improvement can be termed in this way. The
distinction between innovation and improvement is
in novelty and originality, as well as in the
significance of impact and scale of change.
(2) Modification of the process: innovation that
10 significantly alters the process, performance, or
When various innovations are being introduced in quality of an existing product (e.g. accelerated
the conventional course of study, for instance learning (AL), charter school, home schooling,
Universal Design of Learning (Meyer et al., 2014); blended learning).
or more expressive presentation of new material
using multimedia; or more effective teaching (3) Transformation of the system: dramatic
methods; or new mnemonic techniques, students’ conversion (e.g. Bologna process; Common Core;
learning productivity may rise to some extent. This fully automated educational systems; autonomous
is an evolutionary change. It partially improves the or self-directed learning; online, networked, and
existing instructional approach to result in better mobile learning).
learning. Such learning methods as inquiry based,
First-level innovations (with a small i ) make
problem based, case study, and collaborative and
small group are evolutionary innovations because reasonable improvements and are important
they change the way students learn. Applying ingredients of everyday life and work. They should
educational technology (ET) in a conventional be unequivocally enhanced, supported, and used.
classroom using an overhead projector, video, or Second-level innovations either lead to a system’s
iPad, are evolutionary, sustaining innovations evolutionary change or are a part of that change
because they change only certain aspects of and, thus, can make a considerable contribution to
learning. National educational reforms, however, educational quality. But we are more concerned
are always intended to be revolutionary with innovations of the third level (with a capital I),
innovations as they are aimed at complete system which are both breakthrough and disruptive and
renovation. This is also true for online learning can potentially make a revolutionary, systemic
because it produces a systemic change that change.
drastically transforms the structure, format, and All innnovations are ultimately directed at changing
methods of teaching and learning. Some qualitative and/or quantitative factors of learning
innovative approaches, like “extreme learning” outcomes:
(Extreme Learning, 2012), which use technology • qualitative: better knowledge, more effective
for learning purposes in novel, unusual, or skills, important competencies, character
nontraditional ways, may potentially produce a development, values, dispositions, effective job
disruptive, revolutionary effect. placement, and job performance; and
Along with types of innovation, the degree of
• quantitative: improved learning parameters such
impact can be identified on the following three
as test results, volume of information learned,
levels:
amount of skills or competencies developed,
college enrollment numbers, measured student assessments for monitoring progress over time as
performance, retention, attrition, graduation rate, the top organizational innovation, and the
number of students in class, cost, and time requirement that students were to explain and
efficiency. elaborate on their answers during science lessons
Innovation can be assessed by its novely, as the top pedagogic innovation in the USA.
originality, and potential effect. As inventing is Overall, the list of innovations selected by OECD
typically a time-consuming and cost-demanding was disappointingly unimpressive.
experience, it is critical to calculate short-term and Innovations usually originate either from the
long-term expenses and consequences of an bottom of the society (individual inventors or small
invention. They must demonstrate significant teams) – bottom-up or grass root approach, or
qualitative and/or quantitative benefits. As a from the top (business or government) – top-down
psychologist Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyi writes, or administrative approach. Sometimes,
“human well-being hinges on two factors: the innovations coming from the top get stalled on
ability to increase creativity and the ability to their way to the bottom if they do not accomplish
develop ways to evaluate the impact of new their goal and are not appreciated or supported by
creative ideas” (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013, p. 322). the public. Should they rise from the bottom, they
In education, we can estimate the effect of may get stuck on the road to the top if they are
innovation via learning outcomes or exam results, misunderstood or found impractical or unpopular.
teacher formative and summative, formal and They can also stop in the middle if there is no
informal assessments, and student public, political, or administrative or financial
self-assessment. Innovation can also be computed backing. Thus, innovations that start at the bottom,
using such factors as productivity (more learning however good they are, may suffer too many
outcomes in a given time), time efficiency (shorter roadblocks to be able to spread and be adopted on
time on studying the same material), or cost a large scale. Consequently, it is up to politicians,
efficiency (less expense per student) data. Other administrators, and society to drive or stifle the
evaluations can include the school academic data, change. Education reforms have always been
college admissions and employment rate of school top-down and, as they near the bottom, typically
graduates, their work productivity and career become diverted, diluted, lose strength, or get
growth. rejected as ineffective or erroneous. As Michael
Assessing the effects of innvoation can also be Fullan writes in the Foreword to an exciting book,
Good to Great to Innovate: Recalculating the
based on the scale of implementation: •
Route to Career Readiness, K012+, “[…] there is a
singular/local/limited; good deal of reform going on in the education
• multiple/spread/significant; and world, but much of it misses the point, or
approaches it superficially” (Sharratt and Harild,
• system-wide/total.
2015, p. xiii).
This gradation correlates with the three levels of Innovations enriching education can be
innovation described above: adjustment, homegrown (come from within the system) or be
modification, and transformation. To make a imported (originate from outside education).
marked difference, educational innovation must be Examples of imported innovations that result from
scalable and spread across the system or wide revolution, trend, or new idea include the
territory. Prominent examples include Khan information technology revolution, social media,
Academy in the USA, GEEKI Labs in Brazil medical developments (MRI), and cognitive
(GEEKI), and BRIDGE International Academies in psychology. Innovations can also be borrowed
Kenya (BRIDGE). Along with scale, the speed of from
adoption or diffusion, and cost are critical for Innovation in education
maximizing the effect of innovation.
Innovations are nowadays measured and
compared internationally. According to the 2011
OECD report (OECD, 2014), the USA was in 24th
place in educational innovativeness in the world. 11
This report singled out the use of student JRIT 10,1
 learning. What, then, is the problem with our
innovations? Why do not we get more concerned
with learning productivity and efficiency? As an
example, let us look at technology applications in
12 teaching and learning.
superior international theories and practices (see
Globalization of Education chapter). National Effects of technology innovations in education
reform may also be a route to innovation, for
A tool is just an opportunity with a handle (Kevin Kelly).
instance when a government decides to
completely revamp the system via a national When analyzing innovations of our time, we cannot
reform, or when an entire society embarks on a fail to see that an overwhelming majority of them
new road, as has happened recently in Singapore, are tangible, being either technology tools
South Korea, and Finland. (laptops, iPads, smart phones) or
Innovations may come as a result of inspiration, technology-based learning systems and materials,
continuous creative mental activity, or “supply e.g., learning management system (LMS),
pushed” through the availability of new educational software, and web-based resources.
technological possibilities in production, or Technology has always served as both a driving
“demand led” based on market or societal needs force and instrument of innovation in any area of
(Brewer and Tierney, 2012, p. 15). In the first case, human activity. It is then natural for us to expect
we can have a wide variety of ideas flowing that innovations based on ET applications can
around; in the second, we observe a ubiquitous improve teaching and learning. Though technology
spread of educational technologies across is a great asset, nonetheless, is it the single or
educational system at all levels; in the third, we main source of today’s innovations, and is it wise
witness a growth of non-public institutions, such as to rely solely on technology?
private and charter schools and private The rich history of ET innovations is filled with
universities. optimism. Just remember when tape recorders,
Innovation in any area or aspect can make a video recorders, TV, educational films,
change in education in a variety of ways. linguaphone classes, overhead projectors, and
Ultimately, however, innovations are about quality multimedia first appeared in school. They brought
and productivity of learning (this does not mean we so much excitement and hope into our classrooms!
can forget about moral development, which New presentation formats catered to various
prepares young people for life, work, and learning styles. Visuals brought reality and
citizenship) (Camins, 2015). Every innovation must liveliness into the classrooms. Information and
be tested for its potential efficiency. The roots of computer technology (ICT) offered more ways to
learning efficiency lie, however, not only in retrieve information and develop skills. With
innovative technologies or teaching alone but even captivating communication tools (iPhones, iPads,
more in uncovering potential capacities for learning Skype, FaceTime), we can communicate with
in our students, their intellectual, emotional, and anybody around the world in real time, visually,
psychological spheres. Yet, while innovations in and on the go. Today we are excited about online
economics, business, technology, and engineering learning, mobile learning, social networking
are always connected to the output of the process, learning, MOOCs, virtual reality, virtual and remote
innovation in education does not necessarily lead laboratories, 3D and 4D printing, and gamification.
to improving the output (i.e. students’ readiness for But can we say all this is helping to produce better
future life and employment). Test results, degrees, learning? Are we actually using ET’s potential to
and diplomas do not signify that a student is fully make a difference in education and increase
prepared for his or her career. Educational learning output?
research is often disconnected from learning Larry Cuban, an ET researcher and writer, penned
productivity and efficiency, school effectiveness, the following: “Since 2010, laptops, tablets,
and quality output. Innovations in educational interactive whiteboards, smart phones, and a
theories, textbooks, instructional tools, and cornucopia of software have become ubiquitous.
teaching techniques do not always produce a We spent billions of dollars on computers. Yet has
desired change in the quality of teaching and academic achievement improved as a
consequence? Has teaching and learning is built on the resources, infrastructure, quality
changed? Has use of devices in schools led to standards, best practices, and innovation.
better jobs? These are the basic questions that These are all useful, tangible things, but where are
school boards, policy makers, and administrators the intangible innovations, such as theoretical
ask. The answers to these questions are ‘no,’ ‘no,’ foundation, particularly pedagogy, psychology, and
and ‘probably not.’ ” (Cuban, 2015). This instructional methodology that are a true
cautionary statement should make us all think hard underpinning of teaching and learning? The
about whether more technology means better emphasis on tools seems to be an effect of
learning. materialistic culture, which covets tangible,
Technology is used in manufacturing, business, material assets or results. Similarly, today’s
and research primarily to increase labor students worry more about grades, certificates,
productivity. Because integrating technology into degrees, and diplomas (tangible assets) than
education is in many ways like integrating about gaining knowledge, an intangible asset
technology into any business, it makes sense to (Business Dictionary, 2016). We may come to
evaluate technological applications by changes in recognize that modern learning is driven more by
learning productivity and quality. William Massy technological tools than by sound theory, which is
and Robert Zemsky wrote in their paper, “Using misleading.
Information Technology to Enhance Academic According to the UNESCO Innovative Teaching
Productivity,” that “[…] technology should be used and Learning (ITL) Research project conducted in
to boost academic productivity” (Massy and several countries, “ICT has great potential for
Zemsky, 1995). National Educational Technology supporting innovative pedagogies, but it is not a
Standards also addressed this issue by introducing magic ingredient.” The findings suggest that “[…]
a special rubric: “Apply technology to increase when considering ICT it is important to focus not
productivity” (National Educational Technology on flash but on the student learning and 21st
Standards, 2004). Why then has technology not century skills that ICT can enable” (UNESCO,
contributed much to the productivity of learning? It 2013). As Zhao and Frank (2003)argue in their
may be due to a so-called “productivity paradox” ecological model of technology integration in
(Brynjolfsson, 1993), which refers to the apparent school, we should be interested in not only how
contradiction between the remarkable advances in much computers are used but also how computers
computer power and the relatively slow growth of are used. Evidently, before starting to use
productivity at the level of the whole economy, technology we have to ask first, “What technology
individual firms, and many specific applications. tools will help our students to learn math, sciences,
Evidently, this paradox relates to technology literature and languages better, and how to use
applications in education. them efficiently to improve the learning
A conflict between public expectations of ET outcomes?”
effectiveness and actual applications in teaching Innovation in education
and learning can be rooted in educators’ attitudes
toward technology. What some educational
researchers write about technology in education
helps to reveal the inherent issue. The pillars and
building blocks of twenty-first century learning, 13
according to Linda Baer and James McCormick
(2012, p. 168), are tools, programs, services, and
JRIT 10,1
policies such as web-enabled information storage
and retrieval systems, digital resources, games,
and simulations, eAdvising and eTutoring, online
revenue sharing, which are all exclusively
14
technological innovations. They are intended to
Thus, the problem of ET innovations is twofold:
integrate customized learning experiences,
any integration of technology in teaching and
assessment-based learning outcomes, wikis,
learning has to demonstrate an increased
blogs, social networking, and mobile learning. The
productivity of teaching and learning, but it can be
foundation of all this work, as these authors write,
achieved only when ET applications are based on
an effective pedagogic theory. Technology isn’t curative. Human agency shapes the path”
innovation will eventually drive pedagogic (Levasseur, 2012). We are all excited by the
innovations, without a doubt, however, this path is technology and information revolution and believe
slower, more complicated, and leads to an in its potential but “[…] perhaps the next important
enormous waste of financial, technical and human revolution isn’t technological, even as technology
resources. marches forward unabated. Perhaps the revolution
that we need, the one we should aspire to, is
Technocentric syndrome societal. Indeed, the next revolution should be one
More disquieting than even the lack of pedagogical of education, empathy, and a broader
foundation for technology-enhanced education is understanding of the world, and of its people and
the sincere belief of many educators that culture” ( Jiang, 2015).
technology will fix all the problems they encounter One of my students wrote in a recent online class,
in the classroom, be they live or virtual. “Students learn from their teachers, not from
Consequently, fewer university professors electronic gadgets.” Do we understand how
nowadays perceive the need for pedagogic students learn in a technology-based environment,
mastery in online teaching in addition to one-on-one with the laptop or mobile phone? Can
content-area expertise as they reason technology we estimate possible changes in the students’
will solve all instructional difficulties anyway. This cognition, learning style, behavior, attitudes,
belief is called “technocentrism” (Pappert, 1990), values, and social relationships under the
which, according to Nickols (2011), is common in influence of electronic devices? It is certainly true
higher education and e-learning discussions. It is that live interaction between students and their
probably common in secondary school as well. teachers offers worthy examples and enlightening
Unfortunately, educators often forget that the experiences for students and gratifying moments
computer is only an extension of human abilities, for teachers. Overestimating the power of
not a replacement or substitute. We, as educators, technology, regrettably, leads to the deterioration
must realize that for technology innovation to of the “human element” (Serdiukov, 2001) in
produce a positive effect in learning it must be technology-based and, particularly, online teaching
preceded by pedagogic leadership, research, and and learning. It further underestimates the need for
sound theory; however, the reality is typically the sound pedagogy and quality teacher preparation. It
reverse. We are excited to grab the new gadget may also have a devastating impact on our ability
and try to fit it into the classroom without to socialize, collaborate, and survive. George
preliminary assessment of its implementation Friedman argues that computers have had
challenges and potential effects, solid research, or “profoundly disruptive consequences on cultural
laying out a theoretical foundation based on live throughout the world” (Friedman, 2012, p. 25),
advanced pedagogic theory which will ensure its which could not have left education unperturbed.
effective use. Former Kodak Chairman George Neil Postman addressed another concern of
Fisher described it this way, “Even good people overemphasizing the role of technology in
get locked into processes that may be totally education, cautioning against “[…] surrendering
inappropriate to deal with a new technology education to technology” (Postman, 1993), which
attacking from underneath (Christensen and may have far-reaching social and cultural
Eyring, 2011, p. 16). consequences (Serdyukov, 2015b). According to
Technology (as an entity) contains an inherent Sousa (2014), the widespread use of technology is
pedagogical value (Accuosti, 2014, p. 5). It pushes having both positive and negative effects on
the limits of what educators can do but is not a students’ attention and memory systems. A strong
magic wand; it is only a means, an instrument, a warning about the negative effects of the Web
tool for an innovative teacher and learner. That we comes from Maurer et al. (2013), who caution that
overestimate technology’s power in education has modern media, particularly networked computers,
its roots in human anticipation of a miracle, or a are endangering our capacity to think, to
hope of finding a quick fix. But “[…] we can’t just remember clearly, and to read and write with
buy iPads (or any device), add water, and hope concentration; they also imperil creativity. “New
that strategy will usher schools to the leading edge technologies, whether or not they succeed in
of 21st century education. Technology, by itself, solving the problem that they were designed to
solve, regularly create unanticipated new working adult students (WALs) willing to have
problems” (Diamond, 2005, p. 505). There are broad access to education and, at the same time,
numerous social, cultural and psychological side to accommodate learning to their busy lives, rather
effects of technology-enhanced or than by its effectiveness as a cognitive tool, which
technology-based education, among them placing is determined by its most attractive feature –
unrealistic hopes on technology, which leads to convenience (Christensen and Eyring, 2011; Song
weakening a student’s and teacher’s effort and et al., 2004). In studies of student satisfaction,
eventually takes the teachers out of the equation. students commonly rate their online experiences
This in turn makes the outcomes of online learning as satisfactory, with convenience being the most
overly dependent on the LMS platform, washing cited reason (Cole et al., 2014). We observe
away human interaction and communication by students’ preference for convenience as a
industrializing and formalizing learning. consumer strategy, and regrettably, not only in
Christensen and Eyring (2011), who wrote about online higher education but across the whole
disruptive innovations that force universities to educational system (Kerby et al., 2014).
change, predict that teaching in the future will be Convenience, along with comfort, helps reduce
disruptable as technology improves and shifts the workload and complexity of learning, as well as the
competitive focus from a teacher’s credentials or strain of face-to-face interaction with the class and
an institution’s prestige to what students actually instructor. It produces a sense of privacy and
learn. Their observations support the findings of self-satisfaction. It also generates a false
other studies that indicate learning occurs best perception that online learning is easier than
when it involves a blend of online and face-to-face learning in the classroom (Aaron, 2007; Westra,
learning, with the latter providing essential 2016), and often leads to online cheating
intangibles best obtained on a traditional college (Spalding, 2012). The convenience, like the
campus. From this statement, one can extrapolate happiness factor, however, means a less
that technology alone cannot ensure productive Innovation in education
and enriched learning and, especially, personal
and social development as students still need a
human element in a technology-enhanced
environment. Additionally, when planning to apply
a new technology to education, we have to 15
consider its potential pedagogic and psychological
effects. Finally, we need a solid, innovative,
JRIT 10,1
theoretical foundation for online learning. This
foundation would help teachers do a better job in
both classroom and online environments than
simply integrating computers and other gadgets
16
into learning. It would help enrich students’
demanding and less rigorous school experience
otherwise almost entirely independent online
(Zhao, 2012, p. 137). Convenience can be a
experiences using only LMS navigation as a GPS
blessing for creative people, liberating them from
in the world of knowledge with inspiring interaction
the need to waste time and energy on trifles;
with a live instructor, peers, and real life.
however, it may also develop self-gratification and
As technology-based education is unquestionably
laziness instead of struggling with obstacles and
going to grow, we need to make it pedagogically,
doing the hard job of digging in the knowledge
psychologically, and socially meaningful and
mine.
effective. At the same time, we want to minimize its
So, accessibility and, especially, convenience,
negative short- and long-term consequences,
enhanced by flexibility of the study schedule and
which reaffirms the need for a comprehensive
comfortable learning environment of one’s office or
theory of technology-based education and serious
bedroom are evidently the key factors of its
research.
popularity among students. The motto of online
education, “Any time, any place, any pace” is
Online learning concerns extremely seductive. Yet, despite a number of
Demand for online learning is largely driven by studies showing that online learning is on a par
with traditional, campus-based learning (Ni, 2013; control panel of civilization. Choose the latter, and
Wrenn, 2016), it is going to take more time and it could be the last real choice you get to make”
effort to really make online learning deliver (Rushkoff, 2010). The raw powers of technology
outcomes comparable to the traditional should be harnessed by sound pedagogy.
classroom-based, face-to-face education. Mattan Pedagogy of online education is just being
Griffel, Founder of “One Month,” an online developed, after two decades of titanic effort
education startup, rethinks online education in the (Serdyukov, 2015a). Online learning is a big
aftermath of the MOOC explosion writing, “[Online business (Stokes, 2012), which should be turned
education] has kind of overstepped its current into a serious academic endeavor. When
effectiveness, and everyone is saying what is improving online learning, we should not narrow
possible by painting this picture, but the tools our innovative focus down to only technical
haven’t reached that point yet” (Crichton, 2015). solutions in all educational issues. We need to
We know very well online education suffers from develop a broader look at all aspects of teaching
restricted interaction among students and with the and learning rather than trying to resolve problems
instructor, is deficient of live collaboration, and and overcome barriers with technology alone.
lacks opportunities for relationships that take form
in a study group. These collective relationships are Barriers to innovation
crucial for individual success. Productive online There are reasons for the discrepancy between
learning also depends on well-developed learning, the drive for educational innovation that we
technology, critical thinking, research, and even observe in some areas, great educational
reading and writing skills, as well as strong intrinsic innovations of recent times, and the daily reality of
motivation, perseverance, and self-efficacy, which the education system.
many students do not possess. Finally, substituting First of all, if we look at the education holistically,
real-life objects and processes with virtual reality is as a complete system in charge of sustaining the
not helpful in developing practical skills, which nation’s need for educating society members and
makes real-world laboratory and experimental building their knowledge and expertise throughout
work less effective in virtual online environments. their active lifetime, we have to acknowledge that
Still, the question remains whether online all educational levels are interrelated and
education has helped improve teaching and interdependent. Moreover, education being a
learning. With the popularity of online education system itself is a component of a larger social
and enormous investment, do online college supersystem, to which it links in many intricate and
programs now prepare better specialists? Have we complicated ways. As a social institution,
achieved the result we had expected, besides education reflects all the values, laws, principles,
widening access to education for working adult and traditions of the society to which it belongs.
learners, formerly marginalized groups, such as Therefore, we need to regard education as a vital,
disabled students and minorities, and people complete, social entity and address its problems,
geographically separated from the learning taking into account these relations and
centers, thus reaching multi-million enrollment in dependencies both within the educational system
online programs by 2016 and making sure that and society.
students enjoy convenience in their studies? In turn, if the society supports innovations in
Innovative technology may bring performance education, then its educational system will
enhancement in some ways but does not continuously and effectively evolve and progress.
necessarily produce a direct benefit to education If it does not, education will stagnate and produce
expressed by increased learning productivity. Are mediocre outcomes. An example of negative
the secondary benefits, like convenience or fun socio-cultural impact on education is mercantilism,
with technology, worthy of heavy investment? which is destroying the ultimate purpose of
What, then, is needed to raise the quality of education, and consumerism which is degrading
education? The real question here is, as always, institutions of higher education (Feeman and
do we control technology, or do we let ourselves Thomas, 2005; Ng and Forbes, 2009; Abeyta,
be controlled by it and those who have created it? 2013). Other harmful social and cultural trends
“Choose the former,” writes an innovative author exert a powerful influence. These include
Douglas Rushkoff, “and you gain access to the monetization of education, entitlement, instant
gratification, and egotism, which destroy education arguments against it often turn to tempting, straw
in general and the development of creativity and man attacks” (Heick, 2016). In many instances,
innovative spirit of students in particular (Kerby et innovation in educational institutions does not take
al., 2014). Such grave societal issues must be priority over pressing routine issues – really,
dealt with forcefully. abiding by the state standards is more urgent.
Second, it is well known that higher education has Teachers and school administrators are commonly
been historically slow to adopt innovations for cautious about a threatening change and have
various reasons (Hoffman and Holzhuter, 2012; little tolerance for the uncertainty that any major
Marcus, 2012; Evans, 1970). Because it is innovation causes. Of course there are schools
complex (due to cohesion and contuinuity of and even districts that are unafraid to innovate and
science) and labor intensive, higher education is experiment but their
particularly difficult to make more productive Innovation in education
(Brewer and Tierney, 2012). Secondary school is
even more conservative than universities because
they cater more and more to students’ well-being
and safety than to their preparation for real life and
work (Gibbons and Silva, 2011). Both secondary 17
and higher education function as two separate and
rather closed systems in their own rights. They are
JRIT 10,1
not only loosely connected to the wider world but
also suffer from a wide disconnect between high
school output measured in graduate learning
outcomes and college entrance student
18
expectations. It seems that “[…] the systems and
success depends on individual leaders and
values of industrial education were not designed
communities of educators who are able to create
with innovation and digital tools in mind.
an innovative professional culture. Pockets of
Innovation, whether it is with technology,
innovation give hope but we need a total, massive
assessment or instruction, requires time and space
support for innovations across society.
for experimentation and a high tolerance for
uncertainty. Disruption of established patterns is Third, one of the reasons for the slow pace of
the modus operandi of innovation. We like the improvements in education is a sharp conflict
fruits of innovation, but few of us have the mettle to between society’s welfare and political and
run the gauntlet of innovation” (Levasseur, 2012). business interests, as vividly illustrated when the
It is paramount, nonetheless, to accept that NCLB took US education on the path of rigid
“innovation is linked to creativity, risk taking, and accountability. It was used by standardized testing
experimentation” (Brewer and Tierney, 2012, p. companies to reap huge profits (or, may be, vice
15), which must be a part of the education system. versa, these companies influenced NCBL). The
trend stifled true education and produced
Innovation is difficult to spread across school and
unsatisfactory learning outcomes that changed the
academia because it disrupts the established
nature of teaching, narrowing the curriculum and
routine and pushes implementers out of their
limiting student learning. (National Council of
comfort zone. Terry Heick writes that “[…] many
Teachers of English, 2014; The National Center for
K-12 schools give lip-service to the concept of
Fair and Open Testing, 2012).
innovation in mission statements, on websites, in
PDs (professional development), and during Fourth, even when an innovation comes to life, it is
committee, council, and board meetings, but lose of little worth without implementation
their nerve when it’s time to make it happen. (Csikszentmihalyi, 2013). Innovation is not about
Supporting something seen as secondary talking the talk but walking the walk. Moreover, an
(innovation) in the face of pressure, far-reaching innovation can make a significant difference only
programs, external standards ranging from when it is used on a wide scale. To create
Common Core to Literacy, Technology, and Career innovations is not enough, they need to be spread
Readiness becomes a matter of priority and job and used across schools and universities, a more
security. While education begs for innovation, difficult task. For the innovation to make a sizable
effect, we need an army of implementers together
with favorable conditions for the invention to The first-order barriers are purely operational
spread and produce a result. Implementers in turn (technological), while the second-order barriers are
have to be creative and motivated to do their job; applicational (pedagogical). The difference in
they must also have freedom to innovate in the approaches to applying technology to teaching and
implementation, security on the job to take risks, learning (overcoming technological vs pedagogical
and control of what they are doing. Ultimately, they barriers) might explain why huge investments in
need be trusted (as are teachers in Finland) to do ET have brought little if any effect to the quality of
their job right. In short, there must be an learning outcomes.
“innovation-receiving system” (Evans, 1970), or a Last but not least, innovations grow in a favorable
“change zone” (Polka and Kardash, 2013). Is this environment, which is cultivated by an educational
where one of the main problems of innovating lies? system that promotes innovation at all levels and
A growing trend in higher education is a market produces creative, critical thinking, self-sufficient,
approach wherein the main goal is set for “meeting life-long learners, problem solvers, and workers.
the demands of the student population that is This system enjoys
learning – a life-long population of learners” a stimulating research climate, encourages
(Afshar, 2016). Universities today are busy uplifting cultural attitudes toward education, and
innovating how to increase students’ satisfaction rallies massive societal support.
and create “exceptional,” “premier,” or The ultimate question is, what innovations do we
“extraordinary” learning experiences rather than really need, and what innovations might we not
caring about their true knowledge and quality need?
achievements. This is clearly an extension of the The Finnish example can teach us a good lesson.
adaptive or differentiated approach to teaching and Pasi Sahlberg identifies a set of reforms popular in
learning, thereby leading to customization of many countries that Finland has not adopted,
education (Schuwer and Kusters, 2014). But this including:
view raises a question: are students’ demands and
• standardization of curriculum enforced by
satisfaction the proper indicators of quality
learning? When we began to be more concerned frequent external tests; • narrowing of the
about how students feel in the classroom, what curriculum to basic skills in reading and
bothers them, and how best to accommodate them
mathematics; • reduced use of innovative teaching
to make their learning experiences superior and
anxiety-free, we began to set aside the quality strategies;
outcomes of the learning process. • adoption of educational ideas from external
Every cloud has a silver lining, fortunately. When sources, rather than development of local internal
market approach is applied to higher education, as capacity for innovation and problem-solving; and
it is in the current national and global competitive
• adoption of high-stakes accountability policies,
environment, the contest for enrollments increases
featuring rewards and sanctions for students,
and forces colleges to decrease attrition in all ways
teachers, and schools (Sahlberg, 2010, p. 10).
possible. This requires innovative approaches. The
institutions that depend on enrollment for their Instead, the Finns went their own, the Finnish Way,
revenue appear more willing to innovate than so profoundly described by Pasi Sahlberg in his
traditional, public universities that enjoy bestselling book (Sahlberg, 2011). So would it be
government support. “Hence, innovation is likely to innovative not to adopt some reforms? A big
vary by several characteristics, including type of question now arises, what is then the American
institution, institution size, market niche, and way to build innovative education? And what would
resources” (Brewer and Tierney, 2012, p. 22). be the global way?
Clearly, private institutions are more adept at
innovating than public ones. The market is a
What to do? Possible solutions
powerful factor, however, the changes it may bring
To create innovations, we need innovators, and
have to be tackled cautiously.
many of them. But though innovation is often a
The hurdles to technology integration are spark originated in the mind of a bright person, it
described by Peggy Ertmer (1999) as external needs an environment that can nourish the fire.
(first-order) and internal (second-order) barriers. This environment is formed and fed by educational
institutions, societal culture, and advanced
economy. Csikszentmihalyi underlines the
importance of creating a stimulating
macroenvironment, which integrates the social,
cultural, and institutional context, and also 19
microenvironment, the immediate setting in which JRIT 10,1
a person works. “Successful environment […]
provide(s) freedom of action and stimulation of
ideas, coupled with a respectful and nurturant
attitude toward potential geniuses” (2013, p. 140).
Control over such an environment, he reasons, is 20
in the educators’ hands. professional community and, certainly, the
Then, when the invention is created, it must fall learners. Walter Polka and Joseph Kardash argue
into a fertile ground like a seed and be cultivated to that the effectiveness of a computer innovation
grow and bring fruit. Csikszentmihalyi writes, project they developed “[…] was facilitated by the
“Creative ideas vanish unless there is a receptive school district leadership because of their focus on
audience to record and implement them […]. the ‘human side’ of change” (Polka and Kardash,
Edison’s or Einstein’s discoveries would be 2013, p. 324). They found correlation between the
inconceivable without the prior knowledge, without implementation process employed in the district
the intellectual and social network that stimulated and the concepts associated with the three general
their thinking and without the social mechanisms need categories of innovation implementers:
that recognized and spread their innovations organizational needs, professional needs, and
(2013, p. 6)”. The audience is not only the personal needs, which contributed to the
educators but also students, parents, policy innovation’s success. Long-lasting changes
makers, and all other members of society who act require “[…] a mixture of cultural and institutional
either as implementers or consumers of the changes, commitment from those within the
innovation. program, and active and engaged leadership,”
Coherent systemic support is essential for growing writes Leticia De Leόn, addressing technological
innovations. As the ITL Research project states, innovations in higher education (De Leόn, 2013, p.
“Important school-level supports tend to be present 347).
in schools with higher concentrations of innovative When we try to innovate education, we often leave
teaching. Based on survey data, in schools where students out of the equation. We do not innovate in
teachers reported higher average levels of students’ learning, their mind, attitudes, behaviors,
innovative teaching practices, they also tended to character, metacognition, and work ethics enough.
report […] a professional culture aligned to support Yet, we try everything we can to improve teaching
innovation, reflection, and meaningful discourse (delivery), while what we actually need is to
about new teaching practices” (UNESCO, 2013). improve learning. In education, nothing works if the
The OECD report on teaching practices and students do not. According to the famous
pedagogical innovation also argues that “Teaching Bulgarian scholar Georgi Lozanov (1988), learning
practices […] are factors affecting student learning is a matter of attitude, not aptitude. This is where
that are more readily modifiable. Moreover, the greatest potential for improving education lies.
additional professional practices have received As a renowned cognitive scientist Daniel
attention, especially those that help transform the Willingham writes, “[…] education makes better
school into a professional learning community” minds, and knowledge of the mind can make
(Vieluf et al., 2012, p. 3). better education” (Willingham, 2010, p. 165). The
Technology integration in education can be most important goal, thus, should be not so much
successful only when the human element is taken to learn STEM but to cultivate innovative people in
into consideration. This then integrates innovators, K-12, grow their autonomy, self-efficiency, and
implementers, educational leadership, foster an entrepreneurial mindset or “a critical mix
Innovation in education of success-oriented attitudes of initiative, intelligent
risk taking, collaboration and opportunity
recognition” (Zhao, 2012, p. 5). To help develop
new survival skills, effective communication and leveraged resources, more focus, and
critical thinking skills, and nurture curious, creative, more discipline, this pathway can accelerate our
critical thinking, independent and self-directed understanding of teaching and learning and
entrepreneurs, we must disrupt the ways of our production of performance enhancing practices
school system and the ways our teachers are and tools” (Shelton, 2011). Research focusing on
prepared. It may be worthwhile to extend the raising productivity and efficiency and improving
commonly used term “career readiness” to “life the quality of learning has to increase in all critical
readiness.” areas of education. One crucial indicator of
Research of exemplary educational systems educational effectiveness is measuring the quality
across the world vividly demonstrates that teacher of learning that remains imperfect. “The lack of
quality is the fundamental element of educational good measures has severely limited the degree to
success: “It is especially teachers who shape which market forces can discipline the provision of
students’ learning environments and help them educational quality” (Massy, 2012). Developing
reach their intellectual potential”: (Vieluf et al., clear and effective measures of educational quality
2012, p. 113). Teacher education and professional is an important venue for future innovative
development are definitely one of the primary research.
areas that call for innovative approaches: teachers Societal support for innovative education and
must be taught to teach well (Marcus, 2012). The building up a new culture of educational
“how” of the teaching (instructional methodology) preeminence both inside the education system and
is as important as the “what” (content) (Morais et around it is paramount for its success. Brunner
al., 2004). A great resource for effective education (1996) suggests viewing education in a broader
is the instructional design and methodology used context of what society intends to accomplish
by teachers, as shown by the ITL Research through its educational investment in the young.
project: “Across countries and classrooms, the The best way to achieve superior education is to
characteristics of assigned classroom activities shape a new educational culture. As Pasi Sahlberg
strongly predicted the 21st century skills that explains, “We are creating a new culture of
students exhibited in their work. Students are education, and there is no way back” (Sahlberg,
much more likely to learn to solve real-world 2011, p. 2).
problems and collaborate productively with their Innovation can be presented as a model in the
peers, for example, if their learning activities are context of its effects on the quality of teaching and
carefully designed to offer opportunities for them to learning within an educational environment, which
do these things. This finding suggests that is permeated by professional and societal cultures
professional development for innovative teaching (Figure 1).
might begin with lesson design” (UNESCO, 2013). Americans’ love affair with the car extends to
Teacher social status is one of the determining computers, iPhones, and the internet. Therefore,
factors of the teacher quality. Teachers’ status in innovations in education focus primarily on
the most advanced countries like Finland, technology and technology applications.
Singapore, South Korea, and Japan is very high. It Technocentrists want to see education more
reflects the quality of teaching and learning and automated, more technology enhanced, and more
also the level of pedagogic innovations. In our technology-controlled in the hope of making
drive to enhance educational innovation, education more effective. The way of doing so
empowering school teachers and college would be through more sophisticated LMS’s,
instructors may be the most important task. Mattan automated analytics, customization, or
Griffel writes, “We need to change the role of individualization of learning and developing the
teachers. What kind of people do we consider student as an avid consumer of digital information.
teachers? How do we elevate teachers in society?” While we realize there is no stopping the
(Crichton, 2015). He believes we have to make technological revolution, we educators must do all
them “rock stars” and bring new perspectives into we can to preserve the primary mission of
the profession. education, which is reflected in a humanistic
Eventually, the most recognized pathway to approach that caters to the whole person wherein
education innovation, writes Shelton, is “[…] basic efforts are made to develop a free, independent,
and applied research […] with more and better critical thinking, active, and effective thinker, doer,
citizen, and worker. Educational innovations
embrace both views, interacting and enriching
each other for society’s common good.

Globalization in education
Along with developing our own innovations and
creating a broad base for implementation, it might
be useful to look outside the box. As the world
becomes more and more globalized, national
education systems are shedding their uniqueness
and gaining a more universal, homogeneous look
(e.g. the Bologna process, which has brought 50
national higher education systems to a common
denominator in Europe and beyond) (Bologna
process, 2016). Scholars indicate there is “[…] the
need for US universities to keep up with the rest of

Innovation

Teachers Students

Quality of education

Environment

Societal culture
Innovation in education

21

Figure 1.
Model of educational innovation
JRIT 10,1

22
the world in today’s highly competitive educational
marketplace” (Wildavsky et al., 2012, p. 1). It is
also economically and culturally beneficial to learn
from each other in the spirit of global cooperation
and share one’s achievements with others. While
in the context of globalization it may be convenient
to have a common education system across the
world, however, to satisfy the needs and global education ideas into teacher preparation
expectations of the nation-state it is necessary to programs. A worthy case of opening up a wide
continue innovating within one’s own system. The world of global education to US teachers and
rich international educational palette offers unique developing outside-the-box thinking is a new
solutions to many issues facing US schools and specialization in the Master of Arts in Teaching
universities. program, “U.S. Education in Global Context” which
What attractive innovative approaches exist in the has been offered at National University since
world that could be applied to the US education 2014. The principal focus of this specialization is
system? To mention just a few, the Confucian on advanced, innovative, and effective
culture of appreciating education in China, Japan, international approaches, ideas, and strategies in
South Korea, and other South-East Asian nations teaching and learning that address the needs of
which brings students’ and parents’ positive and the nation and create contemporary school
respectful societal attitudes toward education and environments to accommodate diverse student
educators; cultural transformation in education and populations. Specialization’s goals and objectives
quality teacher preparation in Finland, Singapore, are designed to help students develop the
and Shanghai; organizational innovations in knowledge, competencies, skills, and dispositions
schools of Ontario, Canada. In Finland, a new required of a globally competent citizen and
ecosystem for learning was created (Niemi et al., world-class educator. Focusing on the universal
2014). Singapore, for one, has become one of the need for continuous improvement in teaching and
top-scoring countries on the PISA tests by learning, this specialization provides students with
cultivating strong school leadership, committing to a balance of philosophy and theory, practice and
ongoing professional development, and exploring application through collaborative research projects
innovative models, like its tech-infused Future and field-based activities. The ultimate outcome of
Schools (EDUTOPIA, 2012b). In Shanghai, China, the four-course specialization is an innovative,
every low-performing school is assigned a team of practical implementation project to apply in the
master teachers and administrators to provide candidates’ schools.
weekly guidance and mentorship on everything The Finns, Singaporeans, South Koreans, Hong
from lesson plans to school culture (EDITOPIA, Kongers, and citizens of other nations consider
2012a). The list of international innovations to education the best way to improve their country’s
cogitate is, fortunately, extensive. Is this what our economy, and it has worked. An even more
educational innovators could do something about? remarkable consequence has been a change to
Daniel Willingham demonstrates a very interesting their national cultures.
angle in international education that substantially This provides a worthy example for other nations,
differs from ours: “In China, Japan and other including ours. To sum up, we need to create
Eastern countries, intelligence is more often favorable conditions for growing our own
viewed as malleable. If students fail a test or don’t innovations, while taking advantage of the best
understand a concept, it’s not that they are stupid international theories and practices.
– they just haven’t worked hard enough yet. This
attribution is helpful to students because it tells Learning faster, learning better, and at a lower
them that intelligence is under their control. If they cost?
are performing poorly, they can do something
about it […] Children do differ in intelligence, but You don’t have the time, you make the time (Thorin
Klosowski).
intelligence can be changed through sustained
hard work” (Willingham, 2010, p. 131). Among many points for educational innovations
There are numerous exciting foreign examples for time definitely deserves close attention. Time is a
the US educators to learn from and innovate, significant factor in education. Attempts to save
implementing and adapting them to US schools. time on learning and raise its productivity are well
Many US educators certainly learn from advanced known to each of us. To increase learning
nations’ educational experiences efficiency using so-called accelerated and
(Darling-Hammond, 2010; Stewart, 2012), but intensive approaches is a promising path for
these innovations find a hard way into the school innovation. These two approaches demonstrate
system. A right step in this direction is to integrate the difference between evolutionary and
revolutionary disruptive approaches. (Serdyukov et al., 2003). When asked what is
Innovation, as we know, can be called to life by more important for them, the cost of the program
social, political, or professional factors but the or the time spent learning, 88 percent of surveyed
strongest is definitely economic. A flat world WALs stated that time was more important, and
(Friedman, 2005) means global competition, faster they were willing to pay more for a shorter program
production cycles, and more to keep up with. Time of the same quality. So accelerated programs are
is speeding up. Requirements for workers are often more competitive than the conventional
rapidly mounting in industry and business due to extended ones. Serdyukov and Serdyukova (2012)
swiftly changing technologies and fierce posit that time efficiency of the learning process is
international competition. It is impractical to spend a decisive factor in assessing a program or a
a third of one’s active lifetime attending secondary course. In their opinion, colleges and universities,
school and college learning in advance what may which are now evaluated based upon the quality of
not be useful on the job in the next 10 to 15 years their education, will soon be selected and valued
because manufacturing, technology, and business based on the time needed for the learning to take
will completely change. place.
Additionally, the cost of a college education is In the same way, programs that cost less will be
rising faster than inflation, though the outcomes more competitive than those that cost more. With
are disproportionate to this rise: “[…] tuition has education budgets decreasing and numbers of
increased faster than inflation, without a learners taking part in education increasing, time
comparable increase in the quality or results” and cost efficiency will play an increasing role in
(Brewer and Tierney, 2012, p. 13). If you ask determining a program’s, and thus an institution’s,
students what worries them most, it is the cost of value.
the next course and its value for their future job. Innovation in education
Education has become more expensive and less
affordable for many people. This also creates a
heavy burden on the state’s budget. Therefore,
educators need to find ways to make education
more time and cost efficient (Hjeltnes and 23
Hansson, 2005).
JRIT 10,1
We can identify two possible roads to take. The
first is to increase revenue, and this is what the
majority of colleges and universities are doing.
Raising tuition, however, has its limits; government
support is drying out. Cutting costs, on the other
24
hand, may undermine some essential aspects of
When considering time investment, instructional
higher education. The second road is to increase
activities are basically concerned with either
learning productivity defined as the output
learning more in the same time (i.e. growth in
(learning outcomes measured in certain units) per
learning outcomes without increasing learning
dollar or per time unit (academic year, semester,
time) or learning the same amount of information
month, week, day, or hour). The former can be
in less time (decreasing learning time or
used to compute cost efficiency, while the latter will
compressing the course). As Serdyukov and
help to define time efficiency. Time efficiency and
Serdyukova (2006) write: “Can we, the educators,
cost efficiency of education are evidently
teach more effectively; can students learn more,
interrelated. The most obvious source of
better and in less time?” (p. 255). The answer to
enhancing educational productivity is integration of
this question can have profound social, economic
ICT; however, there are other ways.
and personal significance as it may affect a
Time is the most precious of commodities,
learner’s career and lifestyle, societal attitude
especially for WALs. Our own survey of National
toward education, the rate of investment in
University students who take accelerated
education, and eventually the nation’s well-being
programs, which allow them to graduate sooner
(Barbera et al., 2015).
than in conventional programs, shows that time is
paramount when selecting their learning program Consideration of time investment in learning
coupled with recent innovations in cognitive
psychology and ET is what brought to life Colorado College, DeVry University, Northeast
accelerated and intensive programs. Various University, Grand Canyon University, Tusculum
approaches and methodologies for providing faster University, and Colorado State University Global.
and shorter education without compromising Online courses also run for four weeks but instead
academic quality have been described in the of face-to-face classroom sessions students
literature (Scott and Conrad, 1992; Rose and participate in threaded discussions (one or two per
Nicholl, 1997; Bowling et al., 2002; Serdyukov, week), view live videoconferencing sessions (one
2008). They are grounded in the newest brain per week), carry out weekly written assignments,
research in the cognitive and emotional potential of develop projects, and in some courses complete
learners (Lozanov, 1978, 1988; Kitaigorodskaya, mandatory field activities (e.g. teacher preparation
1995), innovative approaches to teaching and programs require school visits for observing and
learning that use nontraditional organizational teaching lessons).
forms, techniques and processes (Boyes et al., The sequential approach when students take one
2004; Serdyukov et al., 2003), ET applications, course after another allows for more accumulated
and even fancy programs of learning during sleep and integrated learning experiences. Besides,
(Ostrander and Schroeder, 2000). The most according to the student survey (Serdyukov et al.,
popular approaches are accelerated learning (AL) 2003), this 1 × 1 format helps to unshackle
programs, which use a compressed, short-term students’ minds and focus their attention and
course format, and intensive learning (IL) energy on a single subject. It can also make it
programs, which employ specially organized easier to adapt to the same teaching/learning style
course structure, visuals, music, and suggestive in this instructional model. The advantages
techniques to open up students’ intellectual and observed for the sequential model appear to occur
sensitive capacities, thereby contributing to more because the more intense, consecutive instruction
effective learning. reduces the number of distractions in the students’
Accelerated and intensive programs can lives, thus allowing for more focused attention and
significantly shorten the duration of the learning ultimately creating a more effective learning
measured in class hours, days, weeks, or environment. Csikszentmihalyi’s (1982) research
semesters. In some cases, they can also increase suggests that “deep concentration,” “immersion” in
learning outcomes measured in the volume of an activity, and “undivided intentionality” lead to
knowledge constructed or skill sets learned in a increasingly rewarding “optimal experiences”
given time. (Serdyukov, 2008). which nourish and strengthen the self. He also
A conventional semester model of college comments that “optimal experience stands out
education may not suit a new generation of WALs against this background of humdrum everyday life
who take school part-time and need to speed up by excluding the noise that interferes with it in
learning to obtain employable competencies and normal existence” (p. 22). This becomes evident
skills. The AL model delivers a semester program when we consider the working adult’s hectic life
in a shorter period of time than the conventional and complicated everyday experiences. Scott and
program model but with the comparable results. Conrad (1992) state that “concentrated study may
National University, for example, offers cultivate skills and understandings which will
undergraduate and graduate-level programs using remain untapped and undeveloped under the
a nontraditional, accelerated 1 × 1 model of traditional system” (p. 417). Therefore, learning
instruction (one month long, one course at a time) only one content area at a time has become one of
for adult learners (Serdyukov et al., 2003). Onsite the crucial factors of AL.
classes usually meet two evening sessions per The intensive approach, a superior level of AL, has
week for four-and-a-half hour each; in some cases, been used in many countries primarily for foreign
there are two additional Saturday morning language education, probably the most
sessions of the same duration. Thus, each course time-consuming didactic endeavor. One indicator
runs for eight evenings with one Saturday morning of how efficiently a student has learned a foreign
final session for graduate programs (totaling 40.5 language is the number of words learned, retained,
hours) or two Saturday sessions for undergraduate and correctly used in communication, both in oral
programs (totaling 45 hours). Similar models are and written speech (reading and writing).
used by such schools as Cornell College, According to research (Longman Dictionary of
Contemporary English, 2007), a person needs to Innovation in education
know and be able to use two to three thousand
words in a foreign language for basic
communication. These so-called communicative
skills can be assessed by the ability of the learner
to accomplish a communication task in certain 25
communicative situations. Duration of the study
course at this level in a conventional institution can
JRIT 10,1
reach 200-300 hours. At a rate of two hours a
week, the course duration may extend to 100 or
more weeks (two years).
When an innovative, intensive instructional
26
methodology, such as suggestopedia (Lozanov,
recognized and did not spread throughout US
1978; Kitaigorodskaya, 1995; Rose and Nicholl,
schools and colleges may be partially due to a lack
1997), is used to teach a foreign language, the
of need (English is spoken worldwide). In addition,
learning efficiency significantly rises, and the
it is labor intensive and demands high-level
course duration with the same outcomes can be
teacher qualifications (special preparation,
reduced by approximately 50 percent, as
dedication, excellent dispositions, inventiveness,
compared to a conventional college course. For
and very hard work in the class). In addition, it
instance, an initial intensive course can take up to
must be taught in specially designed and equipped
100 to 150 hours. The course is usually taught with
classrooms. Finally, it depends on students’
higher frequency and longer lessons (usually four
elevated intrinsic motivation, work ethic, trust and
to five hours, two to three or more times a week).
respect for the teacher, and perseverance, though
Thus, a complete course of study may be
for a limited time.
completed only in ten weeks (2.5 months). So time
Both accelerated and intensive short-term courses
efficiency (Et) of an intensive foreign language
demand highly efficient planning, organization, and
course in the number of hours (t) is of the order of
management of the instructional process.
2 (200 hours of a conventional course (c) divided
Furthermore, to ensure efficient course delivery,
by 100 hours of an intensive course (i)):
innovative methods and technologies are required
tc for effective presentation, processing, skill
Et ¼ ti; development, and real-life applications. Many
Time efficiency of the same intensive course in the accomplishments in AL and IL methodologies,
number of weeks is of the order of 10: duration of incidentally, can be used to teach other than
a conventional course (dc) (100 weeks) divided by foreign language programs.
the duration of an intensive course (di) (ten We formulated ten major principles that create the
weeks): foundation of IL: • learner-centered approach;
dc • specific structure and organization of the course
Et ¼ di: and its content for consistent, “whole” student
This is a case of disruptive, revolutionary experience;
innovation that produces a radical transformation • effective content presentation in various formats
in foreign language learning where learners and modalities;
achieve course goals and objectives in half the
• immediate application of new knowledge in
study hours and one-tenth of a typical course
duration. This approach, which was extremely authentic situations in the class and real life, and
popular in Eastern Europe (Bulgaria, Soviet Union) gaining practical outcomes of the course;
in the 1980s and 1990s, was to a larger extent • iterative process of knowledge construction and
inspired by the rise of the Iron Curtain and skill development (Serdyukov and Ryan, 2008);
prospective emigration to the west. Some • situated learning (Lave and Wenger, 1991) that
variations or similar approaches emerged later in uses real-life situations as the basis of learning
Germany, England, Japan, and the USA (Rose activities and, especially, in developing
and Nicholl, 1997). Why it was not
professional competence; independent learners and online students for
• continuous active communication, collaboration,
whom effective time management is a well-known
and cooperation among students in various small- issue. Therefore, teachers need be taught to use
and big-group activities; time effectively. In teacher preparation programs,
for instance, we recommend that teachers use
• high level of intrinsic motivation developed and time estimates when planning lessons (Serdyukov
constantly supported through emotional and Ryan, 2008; FEA, 2016). Thus, making
involvement of each student in team work and learning more time and cost efficient offers a
learning process; promising venue for further innovations.
• instructor’s suggestive, supportive, and efficient
teaching style incorporating incessant involvement Conclusion
with the class; immediate, objective, and US education desperately needs effective
stimulating feedback; continuous student support; innovations of scale that can help produce high
• systemic use of ET in classroom and homework
quality learning outcomes across the system and
both for content acquisition and skill development, for all students. We can start by intensifying our
for communication and collaboration, and for integration of successful international learning
maintaining students’ high level of cognitive, models and creating conditions in our schools and
physical, and emotional state; colleges that foster and support innovators and
educational entrepreneurs, or edupreneurs (Tait
• application of suggestive techniques, such as and Faulkner, 2016). Moreover, these
relaxation, ritual structure of classroom activities, transformations should be varied, yet systematic,
positive environment, emotional involvement, and targeting different vital aspects of education. Deep,
music; and multifaceted, and comprehensive innovations, both
• combination of intensive work and total relaxation. tangible and intangible, have the capacity to
quickly generate scalable effects.
This approach is rooted in consistent, systemic Radically improving the efficiency and quality of
application of all these principles. The formula for teaching and learning theory and practice, as well
IL is as follows: The more organized and efficient as the roles of the learner, teacher, parents,
the instructional system, the more focused the community, society, and society’s culture should be
student, the more effort is produced, the better the the primary focus of these changes. Other
effect of learning, the faster the rate of learning, promising approaches should seek to improve
and the shorter the process duration (Serdyukov students’ work ethic and attitudes toward learning,
and Serdyukova, 2006). This is why all accelerated their development of various learning skills, as well
and intensive courses are always short (two weeks as making learning more productive. We also have
to 1-2 months long). If no significant effort is to bring all grades, from preschool to higher and
applied to learning, then there is no effect, no postgraduate levels, into one cohesive system.
increase in productivity, and consequently, no As the price of education, especially at colleges
opportunity to shorten the duration of the course. and universities, continues to rise, cost and time
So, accelerated programs that speed up learning efficiency of learning, effective instructional
by compressing the course duration, while approaches, and methods and tools capable of
requiring the same number of hours for the same fulfilling the primary mission of education all will
learning outcomes, are an evolutionary innovation. become critical areas of research and inventive
Intensive programs that provide better outcomes in solutions. Colleges and universities must
a considerably shorter time are a revolutionary concentrate on expanding the value of education,
innovation. We can state now that when an maximizing the productivity of learning, correlating
innovation ensures significantly better outcomes investments with projected outcomes, and
and saves on cost or time by at least an order of 2 improving cost and time efficiency.
(100 percent) or more, we can call it a Whatever technologies we devise for education,
revolutionary innovation. however much technology we integrate into
Measuring time in learning can be instrumental for learning, the human element, particularly the
increasing its productivity. Learning to manage learner and teacher, remains problematic. So,
time productively is especially acute for while taking advantage of effective educational
technologies, we must situate those modern tools Abeyta, E. (2013), “Lifelong customers: the response to
within a wider context of human education in order student consumerism”, The Evolllution, available at:
to preserve its humanistic, developmental purpose http://evolllution.com/opinions/lifelong-customers-respon
and, thus, make more effective use of them. se-student-consumerism/ (accessed September 10,
Computers for schools are ready, but are we 2016).
ready? Our understanding of how students learn Accuosti, J. (2014), “Factors affecting education
and how teachers teach and craft their technology success”, ASEE 2014 Zone I Conference,
methodology in technology-based environments April 3-5, available at:
remains lacking. Questions to ask are whether www.asee.org/documents/zones/zone1/2014/
current methods help increase learning Student/PDFs/112.pdf
productivity, and as a result, time and cost Afshar, V. (2016), “Disrupting higher education”, a blog,
efficiency. All technology applications require a The Huffington Post, August 5,available at:
solid theoretical foundation based on purposeful, www.huffingtonpost.com/vala-afshar/disrupting-higher-ed
systemic research and sound pedagogy to ucati_b_11341146.html?
increase efficiency and decrease possible side Baer, L. and McCormick, J. (2012), “Building the capacity
issues. When integrating novel technologies in for change through innovation”, in Hoffman, A. and
teaching and learning, we must first consider their Spangehl, S. (Eds), Innovation in Higher Education:
potential applicability, anticipated costs and Igniting the Spark for Success, American Council on
benefits, and then develop successful educational Education, Rowman&Litttlefield Publishers Inc., Lanham,
practices. MD, pp. 165-181.
Therefore, the key to a prosperous, inventive Barbera, E., Gros, B. and Kirschner, P. (2015), “Paradox
society is a multidimensional approach to of time in research on educational technology”, Time &
revitalizing the educational system (structures, Society 2015, Vol. 24 No. 1, pp. 96-108, available at:
tools, and stake holders) so that it breeds learners’ http://tas.sagepub.com/ content/24/1/ 96.refs (accessed
autonomy, self-efficacy, critical thinking, creativity, August 13, 2016).
and advances a common Bok, D. (2007), Our Underachieving Colleges, Princeton
Innovation in education University Press, Princeton, NJ, p. 6.
Bologna Process (2016), "European higher education
area and Bologna process", available at: www. ehea.info/
(accessed May 28, 2016).
Bowling, N., Ries, K. and Ivanitskaya, L. (2002),“How
27 effective are compressed courses?”, On Target, Vol. 1
JRIT 10,1 No. 3, pp. 3-7, available at:
www.cel.cmich.edu/ontarget/aug02/ (accessed April 1,
2012).
Boyes, L., Reid, I., Brain, K. and Wilson, J. (2004),
Accelerated Learning: A Literature Survey, Unit for
28 Educational Research & Evaluation, University of
culture that supports innovative education. In order Bradford, Bradford, available at:
to succeed, innovative education must become a www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/giftedandtalented/downloads
collective matter for all society for which we must /word/accellearnreport.doc (accessed April 1, 2006).
generate universal public responsibility. Otherwise, Brewer, D. and Tierney, W. (2012), “Barriers to
all our efforts to build an effective educational innovation in the US education”, in Wildavsky, B., Kelly,
system will fail. A. and Carey, K. (Eds), Reinventing Higher Education:
The Promise of Innovation, Harvard Education Press,
Cambridge, MA, pp. 11-40.
References Brunner, J. (1996), The Culture of Education, Harvard
Aaron, S. (2007), “An insider’s look at online learning”, University Press, Cambridge, MA.
Teaching Community, available at: Brynjolfsson, E. (1993), “The productivity paradox of
http://teaching.monster.com/education/articles/1599-an-i information technology: review and assessment”,
nsiders-look-at-online-learning?print= true (accessed Communications of the ACM, Vol. 36 No. 12, pp. 67-77.
September 3, 2016).
Business Dictionary (2016), “Definition of the term
‘intangible asset’ ”, available at: www. Educational Foundation, available at: www.edutopia.
businessdictionary.com/definition/intangible-asset.htmlorg/education-everywhere-international-shanghai-china-
(accessed November 11, 2016). video
Camins, A. (2015), “What’s the purpose of education in EDUTOPIA (2012b), “Singapore”, George Lucas
the 21st century?”, Washington Post’ education blog, Educational Foundation, available at: www.edutopia.
The Answer Sheet, February 12, available at: org/education-everywhere-international-singapore-video
www.arthurcamins.com/?p=319 (accessed October 14, Ertmer, P. (1999), “Addressing first- and second-order
2016). barriers to change: strategies for technology integration”,
Christensen, C. and Eyring, H. (2011), The Innovative Educational Technology Research and Development,
University: Changing the DNA of Higher Education from Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 47-61, available at:
the Inside out, Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF02299597
Christensen, C. and Overdorf, M. (2000), “Meeting the Evans, R. and Leppmann, P. (1970), Resistance to
challenge of disruptive change”, Harvard Business Innovation in Higher Education, Jossey-Bass Publishers
Review, Vol. 2 No. 78, pp. 47-76. Inc., San Francisco, CA.
Cole, M., Shelley, D. and Swartz, L. (2014), “Online Extreme Learning (2012), available at:
www.extreme-learning.org/ (accessed September 22,
instruction, e-learning, and student satisfaction: a three
year study”, The International Review of Research in 2016). FEA (2016), “Time-on-task: a strategy that
Open and Distance Learning, Vol. 13 No. 6, available at:accelerates learning”, FEAWeb, available at:
www.irrodl.org/index.php/irrodl/article/view/1748/3123 https://feaweb.
(accessed July 22, 2016). org/time-on-task-a-teaching-strategy-that-accelerates-lea
rning (accessed August 9, 2016). Feeman, I. and
Cornali, F. (2012), “Effectiveness and efficiency of
Thomas, M. (2005), “Consumerism in education: a
educational measures”, Evaluation Practices, Indicators
comparison between Canada and the United Kingdom”,
and Rhetoric, Vol. 2 No. 3, pp. 255-260, available at:
International Journal of Educational Management, Vol.
www.SciRP.org/journal/sm Creating Innovators (2012),
19 No. 2, pp. 153-177, available at:
“America’s last competitive advantage”, available at:
www.emeraldinsight.com/doi/abs/10.1108/09513540510
http:// creatinginnovators.com/ (accessed September 28,
582444
2016).
Friedman, T. (2005), The World is Flat: A Brief History of
Crichton, D. (2015), “Searching for the next wave of
the Twenty-First Century, Farrar, Straus and Giroux, New
education innovation”, TechCrunch, available at:
York, NY.
https://techcrunch.com/2015/06/27/education-next-wave/
(accessed September 23, 2016). Csikszentmihalyi, M. Friedman, G. (2012), The Next Decade: Empire and
(1982), “Toward a psychology of optimal experiences”, Republic in a Changing World, Anchor Books, New York,
Review of Personality and Social Psychology, No. 3, pp. NY.
13-36. Fullan, M. (2007), Leading in a Culture of Change,
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2013), Creativity: The Psychology Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Fullan, M. (2010), All
of Discovery and Invention, Harperperennial, New York, Systems Go: The Change Imperative for Whole System
NY. Reform, Corwin, Newbury Park, CA.
Cuban, L. (2015),“Larry Cuban on school reform and Gibbons, S. and Silva, O. (2011), “School quality, child
classroom practice: the lack of evidence-based practice: well-being and parents’ satisfaction”, Economics of
the case of classroom technology”, available at: Education Review, Vol. 30 No. 2, pp. 312-331.
https://larrycuban.wordpress.com/2015/02/05/the Groom, J. and Lamb, B. (2014), “Reclaiming innovation”,
lack-of-evidence-based-practice-the-case-of-classroom-t EDUCAUSE Review, Vol. 49 No. 3, available at:
echnology-part-1/ (accessed August 29, 2016). www.educause.edu/visuals/shared/er/extras/2014/Reclai
Darling-Hammond, L. (2010), The Flat World and mingInnovation/default.html Hargreaves, A. (2003),
Education: How America’s Commitment to Equity will Teaching in the Knowledge Society: Education in the
Determine Our Future, Teachers College Press, New Age of Insecurity, Teachers College Press, New York,
York, NY. NY.
De Leόn, L. (2013), “Managing technological innovation Hargreaves, A. and Shirley, D. (2009), The Fourth Way:
and issues of licensing in higher education”, in Ran, B. The Inspiring Future of Educational Change, Corwin,
(Ed.), The Dark Side of Technological Innovation, Thousand Oaks, CA.
Information Age Publishing, Charlotte, NC, pp. 347-371. Hargreaves, A., Lieberman, A., Fullan, M. and Hopkins,
Diamond, J. (2005), Collapse: How Societies Choose to D. (Eds) (2010), Second International Handbook of
Fail or Succeed, Penguin Book, New York, NY. Educational Change, Springer, New York, NY.
EDITOPIA (2012a), “Shanghai”, George Lucas Innovation in education
 Lave, J. and Wenger, E. (1991), Situated Learning.
Legitimate Peripheral Participation, University of
Cambridge Press, Cambridge.
Levasseur, A. (2012), “Does our current education
29 system support innovation?”, MindShift, July 17,
JRIT 10,1 available at:
ww2.kqed.org/mindshift/2012/07/17/does-our-current-ed
ucation-system-support innovation/ (accessed
September 21, 2016).
Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English (2007),
30 Longman Communication 3000, Pearson Longman ELT,
Heick, T. (2016), “12 Barriers to innovation in education”, White Plains, NY.
TeachThought. available at: www. Lozanov, G. (1978), Suggestology and Outlines of
teachthought.com/the-future-of-learning/disruption-innov Suggestopedy, Gordon and Breach Science Pub, New
ation/12-barriers-innovation-education/ (accessed York, NY.
August 12, 2016). Lozanov, G. (1988), The Foreign Language Teacher’s
Hjeltnes, T. and Hansson, B. (2005), “Cost effectiveness Suggestopedic Manual, Routledge, London.
and cost efficiency in e-learning”, The TISIP Foundation, Marcus, J. (2012), “Old school: four-hundred years of
Trondheim, available at: resistance to change”, in Wildavsky, B., Kelly, A. and
www2.tisip.no/quis/public_files/wp7-cost-effectiveness Carey, K. (Eds), Reinventing Higher Education: The
efficiency.pdf (accessed September 29, 2016). Promise of Innovation, Harvard Education Press,
Hoffman, A. and Holzhuter, J. (2012), “The evolution of Cambridge, MA, pp. 41-72.
higher education: innovation as natural selection”, in Massy, W. (2012), “Creative paths to boosting academic
Hoffman, A. and Spangehl, S. (Eds), Innovation in productivity”, in Wildavsky, B., Kelly, A. and Carey, K.
Higher Education: Igniting the Spark for Success, (Eds), Reinventing Higher Education: The Promise of
American Council on Education, Rowman & Litttlefield Innovation, Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA,
Publishers Inc., Lanham, MD, pp. 3-15. pp. 73-100.
Huffington Post (2012), “College preparedness lacking, Massy, W. and Zemsky, R. (1995), Using Information
forcing students into developmental coursework, Technology to Enhance Academic Productivity, Educom,
prompting some to drop out”, Huffington Post, June 6, Washington, DC, available at: http://net.educause.edu/ir/
available at: www.huffingtonpost.com/ 20 library/html/ nli0004.html (accessed September 24,
12/06/18/students-lacking-college-_n_1606201.html 2016).
(accessed May 1, 2015).
Matthew, M. (Ed.) (1964), Innovation in Education,
Jaschik, S. (2015), “Well-prepared in their own eyes”, Teachers College Press, New York, NY.
Inside Higher, available at: www.insidehighered.
Maurer, H., Mehmood, R. and Korica-Pehserl, P. (2013),
com/news/2015/01/20/study-finds-big-gaps-between-stu
“How dangerous is the web for creative work?”, Journal
dent-and-employer-perceptions (accessed August 25,
of Computing and Information Technology, Vol. 21 No. 2,
2016).
pp. 59-69.
Jiang, L. (2015), “Why education innovation is the most
Mercurio, Z. (2016), “How college kills purpose”, The
important thing you could pursue”, Getting Smart,
Huffington Post, May 24, available at: www.
available at:
huffingtonpost.com/zach-mercurio/how-college-kills-purp
http://gettingsmart.com/2015/04/why-education-innovatio
ose_b_10013944.html
n-is-the-most important-thing-you-could-pursue/
(accessed July 18, 2016). Meyer, A., Rose, D. and Gordon, D. (2014), Universal
Design of Learning: Theory and Practice, CAST
Kerby, M., Branham, K. and Mallinger, G. (2014),
Professional Publishing, Wakefield, MA.
“Consumer-based higher education: the uncaring of
learning”, Journal of Higher Education Theory and Morais, A., Neves, I. and Pires, D. (2004), “The what and
Practice, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 42-54, available at: the how of teaching and learning: going deeper into
www.na-businesspress.com/JHETP/KerbyMB_Web14_5 sociological analysis and intervention”, in Muller, J.,
_.pdf Davies, B. and Morais, A. (Eds), Thinking with Bernstein,
Working with Bernstein, Routledge, London.
Kitaigorodskaya, G. (1995), Intensive Foreign Language
Teaching: History, Current Status and Future Trends, National Council of Teachers of English (2014),“How
MGU, Moscow (in Russian). standardized tests shape – and limit – student learning:
a policy research brief produced by the National Council internationally”, Pew Research Center, February 2,
of Teachers of English”, available at: www. available at: www.pewresearch.
ncte.org/library/NCTEFiles/Resources/Journals/CC/0242 org/fact-tank/2015/02/02/u-s-students-improving-slowly-i
-nov2014/CC0242PolicyStandardized.pdf (accessed n-math-and-science-but-still-lagging internationally/
September 9, 2016). (accessed July 27, 2016).
National Educational Technology Standards (2004), Polka, W. and Kardash, J. (2013), “Managing in the
ISTE, available at: http://ced.ncsu.edu/techcomps/ effective change zone to implement a ‘1-to-1’ laptop
unets5.html (accessed March 12, 2013). program in a rural school district”, in Ran, B. (Ed.), The
Ni, A. (2013), “Comparing the effectiveness of classroom Dark Side of Technological Innovation, Information Age
and online learning: teaching research methods”, JournalPublishing, Charlotte, NC, pp. 323-346.
of Public Affairs Education, Vol. 1 No. 19, pp. 199-215. Postman, N. (1993), Technopoly: The Surrender of
Nickols, M. (2011), “Articulating e-pedagogy for Culture to Technology, Vintage Books, New York, NY.
education. Open learning for an open world”, in Barrett, Robinson, K. (2015), Creative Schools: The Grassroots
J. (Ed.), Reflections on Open and Distance Learning and Revolution that’s Transforming Education, Viking Press,
Teaching at the Open Polytechnic of New Zealand, New York, NY.
Lower Hutt, pp. 321-336. Rose, C. and Nicholl, M.J. (1997), Accelerated Learning
Niemi, H., Multisilta, J., Lipponen, L. and Vivitsou, M. for the 21st Century. The Six-step Plan to Unlock Your
(Eds) (2014), Finnish Innovations and Technologies in Master-Mind, Dell Publishing, New York, NY.
Schools: A Guide Towards New Ecosystems of Learning, Rubin, C. (2015), “The global search for education:
Sense Publishers, University of Helsinki, Rotterdam, United States and Finland – why are they so great?”,
available at: www.cicero.fi/files/Cicero/site/2121-finnish The Huffington Post, February 6, available at:
innovations-and-technologies-in-schools_ToC.pdf www.huffingtonpost.com/c-m-rubin/the-global
(accessed October 2, 2016). search-for-edu_b_6992056.html (accessed July 19,
Ng, I. and Forbes, J. (2009), “Education as service: the 2016).
understanding of university experience through service Rushkoff, D. (2010), Program or be Programmed. Ten
logic”, Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, Vol. 19 Commands for a Digital Age, OR Books, New York, NY.
No. 1, pp. 38-64.
Innovation in education
OECD (2014), Measuring Innovation in Education: A
New Perspective, OECD Publishing, Paris, available at:
http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264215696-en (accessed
August 30, 2016).
Office of Innovation and Improvement (2016), “US 31
Department of Education”, available at: http://
innovation.ed.gov/ (accessed September 1, 2016). JRIT 10,1
Okpara, F. (2007), “The value of creativity and innovation
in entrepreneurship”, Journal of Asia Entrepreneurship
and Sustainability, Vol. III No. 2, pp. 2-14, available at:
www.
asiaentrepreneurshipjournal.com/ajesiii2okpara.pdf 32
Sahlberg, P. (2010), “Educational change in Finland”, in
Osolind, K. (2012), “Revolutionary vs evolutionary
Hargreaves, A., Lieberman, A., Fullan, M. and Hopkins,
innovation”, Reinvention Consulting, available at:
D. (Eds), Second International Handbook of Educational
www.reinventioninc.com/revolutionvsevolution (accessed
Change, Springer, New York, NY, pp. 323-348.
October 16, 2016).
Sahlberg, P. (2011), Finnish Lessons: What Can the
Ostrander, S. and Schroeder, L. (2000), Superlearning: World Learn from Educational Change in Finland,
New Triple Fast Ways You Can Learn, Earn, and Teachers College, Columbia University, New York, NY.
Succeed in the 21st Century, Delacorte Press, New York,
Schuwer, B. and Kusters, B. (2014), “Mass
NY.
customization of education by an institution of HE: what
Pappert, S. (1990), “A Critique of technocentrism in can we learn from industry?”, The International Review
thinking about the school of the future”, available at: of Research in Open and Distributed Learning, Vol. 12
www.papert.org/articles/ACritiqueofTechnocentrism.html No. 2.
(accessed December 25, 2015). Science Watch (2009), “Top 20 countries in all fields”,
Pew Research Center (2015), “US students improving – Science Watch, Clarivate Analytics, Philadelphia, PA,
slowly – in math and science, but still lagging available at:
http://archive.sciencewatch.com/dr/cou/2009/09decALL/ Learns Mathematics, Korwin, Thousand Oaks, CA.
(accessed August 6, 2016). Scott, P. and Conrad, C. Spalding, E. (2012), Claire Fox: Is Consumerism Bad for
(1992), “A critique of intensive courses and an agenda Education? Liberty World Press, available at:
for research”, Higher Education: Handbook of Theory http://libertyuom.wordpress.com/2012/04/30/claire-fox-is-
and Research, Agathon Press, New York, NY, pp. consumerism-bad-for-education/ (accessed September
411-459. Serdiukov, P. (2001), “Models of distance 12, 2016).
higher education: fully automated or partially human?”, Spangehl, S. and Hoffman, A. (2012), “Perspectives on
Educational Technology Review. International Journal on innovation”, in Hoffman, A. and Spangehl, S. (Eds),
Educational Technology Issues & Applications, Vol. 9 No. Innovation in Higher Education: Igniting the Spark for
1, pp. 15-25. Success, American Council on Education, Rowman &
Serdyukov, P. (2008), “Accelerated learning: what is it?”, Litttlefield Publishers Inc., Lanham, MD, pp. 17-26.
Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching, Vol. 1 No. 1, Stewart, V. (2012), A World-Class Education: Learning
pp. 36-59. from International Models of Excellence and Innovation,
Serdyukov, P. (2015a), “Does online education need a ASCD, Alexandria, VA.
special pedagogy?”, Journal of Computing and Stokes, P. (2012), “What online learning can teach us
Information Technology, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 61-74, about higher education?”, in Wildavsky, B., Kelly, A. and
available at: http://cit.srce.unizg.hr/index.php/ CIT/ Carey, K. (Eds), Reinventing Higher Education: The
article/ view/2511 Promise of Innovation, Harvard Education Press,
Serdyukov, P. (2015b), “Paradox of teacher and student Cambridge, MA, pp. 197-224.
in online education and societal culture”, Proceedings of Strauss, V. (2014), “Five US innovations that helped
Global Learn 2015. Association for the Advancement of Finland’s schools improve but that American reformers
Computing in Education (AACE), pp. 713-723. now ignore”, The Washington Post, July 25, available at:
Serdyukov, P. and Ryan, M. (2008), Writing Effective www.washingtonpost.com/
Lesson Plans: The 5-Star Approach, Allyn&Bacon, news/answer-sheet/wp/2014/07/25/five-u-s-innovations-t
Boston, MA. hat-helped-finlands-schools-improve-but
Serdyukov, P. and Serdyukova, N. (2006), “Innovative that-american-reformers-now-ignore/?utm_term=.cec08c
approaches in technology-based education: Accelerated 870e6b (accessed October 4, 2016).
and intensive learning”, Proceedings of the Ninth Tait, A. and Faulkner, D. (2016), Edupreneur: Unleashing
IASTED International Conference on Computers and Teacher Led Innovation in Schools, Wiley, Hoboken, NJ.
Advanced Technology in Education, CATE 2006, Lima, The National Center for Fair and Open Testing (2012),
October 4-6, pp. 45-50. “How standardized testing damages education”, Fair
Serdyukov, P. and Serdyukova, N. (2012), “Time as test, The National Center for Fair and Open Testing,
factor of success in online learning”, Journal of Jamaica Plain, MA, available at: http://
Information Technology and Application in Education, fairtest.org/how-standardized-testing-damages-educatio
Vol. 1 No. 2, pp. 40-46, available at: www. n-pdf (accessed August 20, 2016).
jitae.org/paperInfo.aspx?ID=1203 Thomson, J. (2015), “Poor grades”, Inside Higher Ed,
Serdyukov, P., Subbotin, I. and Serdyukova, N. (2003), July 9, available at: www.inside
“Accessible, convenient and efficient education for highered.com/news/2015/06/09/national-poll-finds-overal
working adults in a shorter time: is it possible?”, CAEL l-dissatisfaction-college-selection process-while-parents
Forum and News, Vol. 26 No. 3, pp. 24-28. Sharratt, L. (accessed August 20, 2016).
and Harild, G. (2015), Good to Great to Innovate: UNESCO (2013), “ITL – Innovative teaching and
Recalculating the Route to Career Readiness, K-12+, learning research: a global look at pedagogies for 21st
Corwin, Thousand Oaks, CA. century skills”, ICT in Education, UNESCO, Bangkok,
Shelton, J. (2011), “Education innovation: what it is and available at: www.unescobkk.org/ education/
why we need more of it”, Education Week, Sputnik post, ict/online-resources/databases/ict-in-education-database
September 28, available at: /item/article/innovative-teaching-and
http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/sputnik/2011/09/educati learning-itl-research-a-global-look-at-pedagogies-for-21s
on_ t-century-skills/ (accessed August 18, 2016).
innovation_what_it_is_and_why_we_need_more_of_it.ht
US Department of Education (2004), “What do we mean
ml (accessed September 16, 2016).
by ‘innovation’?”, US Department of Education, available
Song, L.S., Singleton, E., Hill, J. and Koh, M. (2004), at:
“Improving online learning: student perceptions of useful www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/oii/about/definition.html
and challenging characteristics”, Internet and Higher Vieluf, S., Kaplan, D., Klieme, E. and Bayer, S. (2012),
Education, pp. 59-70. Sousa, D. (2014), How the Brain Teaching Practices and Pedagogical Innovation:
Evidence from TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, available Innovation in education
at: www.oecd.org/edu/school/
TalisCeri%202012%20(tppi)–Ebook.pdf
Wagner, T. (2012), Creating Innovators: The Making of
Young People who Will Change the World, Scribner,
New York, NY.
33
Westra, K. (2016), “Faculty and student perceptions of
effective online learning environments”, Paper No. 596,
all theses, dissertations, and other capstone projects,
Minnesota State University, Mankato, MN, available at:
http://cornerstone.lib.mnsu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?articl
e=1595& context=etds (accessed August 25, 2016).
Wildavsky, B., Kelly, A. and Carey, K. (Eds) (2012),
Reinventing Higher Education: The Promise of
Innovation, Harvard Education Press, Cambridge, MA.
Willingham, D. (2010), “Why don’t students like school?”,
A Cognitive Scientist Answers Questions about How the
Mind Works and What it Means for Your Classroom,
Jossey-Bass, San Francisco, CA. Wrenn, V. (2016),
“Effects of traditional and online instructional models on
student achievement outcomes”, Paper No. 1135,
doctoral dissertations and projects, Liberty University,
Lynchburg, VA, available at:
http://digitalcommons.liberty.edu/doctoral/1135
(accessed August 22, 2016). Yu, D. and Hang, C.C.
(2010), “A reflective review of disruptive innovation
theory”, International Journal of Management Reviews,
Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 435-452, available at:
http://onlinelibrary.
wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1468-2370.2009.00272.x/full
Zeihan, P. (2014), The Accidental Superpower: The Next
Generation of American Preeminence and the Coming
Global Disorder, Twelve Hachette Book Group, New
York, NY.
Zhao, Y. (2012), World Class Learners: Educating
Creative and Entrepreneurial Students, Corwin,
Thousand Oaks, CA.
Zhao, Y. and Frank, K. (2003), “Factors affecting
technology uses in schools: an ecological perspective”,
available at:
https://msu.edu/~kenfrank/papers/Factors%20affecting%
20technology%20uses %20in%20schools.pdf (accessed
July 21, 2016).

Corresponding author
Peter Serdyukov can be contacted at: [email protected]

For instructions on how to order reprints of this article,

please visit our website:
www.emeraldgrouppublishing.com/licensing/reprints.htm
Or contact us for further details:
[email protected]