Seminar Report
Ed.: Rosa Gunnarsdottir
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Table of Contents
Introduction
Seminar 1
Seminar 2
Seminar 3
Seminar 4
First International InnoEd Conference
Conclusion
2
2
5
5
5
5
6
Introduction
This report will gather together information on the four project seminars and the first InnoEd
conference held as a part of the InnoEd: Practical use of IT and ODL in Innovation
Education project. In the projects work plans each seminar had an objective which was an
integral part of the project plans and evaluations of the project progress. The emergent
design of the project was dependant on the participation in the seminars regarding
evaluation of experience in the project and suggestions on next steps and product designs.
The objectives of the seminars can be seen in the project detailed work plans.
Seminar 1 Evaluation and planning
Place: Gnúpverjaskóli Iceland
Time: 20-25 March 2002
Chair of Seminar: Svanborg Jónsdóttir
Agenda
Wednesday 20th of March
9:00
SmartVr, introduction of the virtual reality and discussions around its use.
10:30
Skyrr, introduction of the company / Jóni Eyfjörð.
12:00
Lunch at KHI The Iceland University of Education,
Introduction of the University and the ODL facilities.
Paul Johanson will introduce the Icelandic competition.
14:00
Foldaskóli, Andrea and Íris will give a demonstration of Innovation Education in the
school.
Thursday 21st of March
9:00
Árnes, introduction of participants their roles and what they have done and what they
want to do / Cathy.
10:00
Introduction of the project and the history of the project / Gísli and Rósa.
11:20
Innovation Education: Ideology in practice / Andrea, Rósa and Svanborg.
13:00
Introduction of the web / Gísli og Svanborg.
14:10
Children from Gnúpverjaskóli.
15:30
The projects homepage and the communication system / Gísli
16:30
The Competitions / Discussions / Matti Lindh.
Friday 22nd March
9:00
Gnúpverjaskóli, Innovation Education: Accounts of experience / Andrea and Svanborg.
10:30
Teaching materials and videos / Gísli.
13:45
The House and the Church and museum at Eyrarbakka / Birgir and Lýður.
15:00
Barnaskólinn á Stokkseyri og Eyrarbakka.
15:30
Graphics, the process of putting ideas into the competition / Gísli, Jóna and Birgir.
Discussions about the development of the web / Gill and Jonathan.
Saturday 23rd of March.
9:00
Group work, the next steps in the project / Kjetil.
13:00
Group work, the next steps in the project / Jarmo
15:00
Conclusions / Matti Hasari
2
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Contributions
Wednesday
SmartVR
Jon the smart showed us possibilities that we might want to use as a part of our platforms. He
showed us what they have been doing with the BBC, Orange and Erickson. Virtual realities with
different aims and objectives, from interactive kids spaces to creative work environments.
Valuable nourishment for our planning phase.
www.smartvr.com
Skyrr
Jon the clever showed us the facilities of the company and the possibilities that Skyrr as a company
has for hosting and keeping secure the children’s ideas.
www.skyrr.is
KHI
The Iceland University of Education is a growing University which has a long history of ODL use and
currently 54% of the students there are ODL students. This experience is will provide us with rich
ground for setting up the teachers platform, teacher training on different levels. Recently the
University has taken up postgraduate studies so masters degrees and doctoral studies can now be
conducted through there.
www.khi.is
Foldaskoli
Andrea and Iris welcomed us to the school and showed us around the projects of the children and the
facilities that they have. Andrea gave us a presentation of the way that Innovation Education is done
in the school and a bit about how it has changed over the years.
Andrea’s power point presentation
www.foldaskoli.ismennt.is
Thursday
Introductions
Kjetil Fredriksen from Ringstabekk school in Norway, just out side of Oslo. The school is a special
school with children 13-16 years of age. The teaching methods make the school special, as the
school policy is based on open plan and project methods, such as storyline. The school already has a
dissemination role in the community as they are often asked to present their experience of their work
to other schools.
Each class has about 60 children but 4 teachers working with them at a time.
They have taken part in other projects such as the entrepreneurship project run by the Nordic Minister
Rad and they have also been doing small business projects with the students and work in Virtual
Reality with Telenorde.
Kjetil is a science teacher, and plays the guitar and has published a CD called Kettle sweet romance.
Jonathan Towers is also a science teacher but at Roundhay School in Leeds, UK. Hehas
background in teaching technology as well and runs a after school and lunch time Young Inventors
Society in the school. Jonathan says that the facilities in Roundhay are none existing as the school is
undergoing major refurbishment and new buildings are being built. He also said that he was very
interested in the 3D and 2D designing.
Jonathan is going to married to the lovely Isabel this summer.
Gillian Walsh works at Roundhay as well she is a maths teacher by trade but also is the head of a
project cell surrounding a government initiative called Gifted and Talented. That is the way that
Innovation Education got into the Roundhay school environment. Gill welcomed Rosa’s experiments
with Jonathan with the Young Inventors Society.
3
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Gillian is a coordinator for GT in five schools in north Leeds and already three of these have taken up
Young Inventors Societies and those are Braimwood Boys school, Primrose High school and Allerton
Grange High School..
Jóna Björk Jónsdóttir is a teacher at Barnaskólinn á Eyrarbakka og Stokkseyri. She took part in one
of the training courses that Gísli and Rósa had two or three years ago when she taught years 5 and
6. As a part of her work with the children in her school in Innovation Education she made a Web
Quest where she used a bit of the material Rósa and Gísli had already put on the web about
Innovation Education.
Jóna is working now with younger students and is finishing a Diploma Course and the Iceland
University of Education. One of her things that she is working on there is Howard Gardner´s theories
on Multiple Intelligences.
Birgir Edwald is the deputy head of Barnaskólinn á Eyrabakka og Stokkseyri (BES). He is a teacher
and a programmer (System specialist I think is the right workd for it in English). Birgir told us that
BES has been very active in the IT sector in the last few years. In 1999 BES became a leading
school in IT development in Iceland getting extra funding for development and resources. This has
spurred projects such as Commenius projects with Oulu and Slovenia and participation in the Idunn
project as well as Innes.
Toumas Lehtinen is a Traning Coordinator for the Kerhokeskus - koulutyön tuki (Center for School
Clubs). That organization makes materials for teachers, and conducts inset training for teachers as
well. They also have part in coordinating and conducting the Young Scientist competition. They are
interested in linking InnoEd competition to theirs. Toumas is finishing his teachers degree also.
Íris Guðlaugsdóttir is a teacher at Foldaskóli and she teaches Innovation Education. She studied
architecture in USA and she sees a lot of things in her teaching of Innovation Education that she
thinks should be a part of every child’s schooling in the world, and that this project could be the start
of it.
Matti Lindh is a lecturer at the Oulu faculty of Education, and he is the only lecturer in Technology in
Finland. He thinks that Innovation Education should be a part of thechnology Education. He
contacted Tuula and Toumas in hope that they would be willing to take on the Inno Ed competition in
Finland. Matti is finishing his doctoral dissertation that is about the question what is technology
education?
Tuula Pihlajamaa works for Technology and Society, Technology Education Projects, which is a part
of the The Finnish Association of Graduate Engineers TEK. She is interested in combining the two
competitions the young scientist competition in Finland and the InnoEd one.
Jarmo Mustikka he is a lecturer at the teacher training school in Oulu. He works with Matti Hasari
and Matti Lindh. Jarmo is the technology teacher in the school and has been working with the other
two in finding ways to connect science and technology teaching in innovative ways.
Böðvar works in BES as well as Jóna and Birgir. He works mainly with the oldest students where he
teaches Mathematics and Icelandic but also he is responsible for the IT of the oldest children. He is
new to Innovation Education but wants to get involve.
Matti Hasari works a the teacher training school in Oulu with Jarmo. The school has 500 students
and 63 teachers. The training school has the goal to train teachers for the north of Finland. His work
with Matti Lindh and Jarmo has been mostly with the oldest children doing electronics and
innovations in teaching.
Svanborg is a deputy head teacher at Gnúpverjaskóli and has been teaching for 24 years. 8 years
ago she found Innovation Education and she thought that this is what teaching was supposed to be
about. The higher aims of Innovation Education helps the children build up their own lives. Svanborg
used to teach English and Danish and she also used to work with the storyline method. She
graduated from Gisli last year as a crafts teacher as well and has been teaching the crafts and
Innovation Education in Gnúpverjaskóli.
4
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Cathy Burke is a lecturer at University of Leeds in Childhood studies. She has a PhD in history, or
rather political history. Where she used Frera’s ideas of that curriculum should work with problems,
and the pedagogy of the oppressed that leads to change. She is very interested in the way that
schools change and more to the point what stops these changes.
She also finished her Masters in web learning which makes her interested in this project and she is a
part of the EERA network that she suggests would benefit from a Innovation Education forum.
Also Cathy ran a competition called The school I like in cooperation with the Guardian newspaper,
which got children to send in their ideas about what their future school should look like and work.
Gísli Þorsteinsson is the assistant professor at Iceland University of Education, department of design
and craft. He started teaching different subject, Danish and Icelandic with crafts in small schools in
the rural parts of Iceland and gradually made his way back to Reykjavik where he taught at Foldaskóli
till 1996 when he moved to the University. He has been active in Innovation Education from the start,
he and Paul Johanson started the first teaching project wich was a summer school in innovation
education in 1991. Gisli has formed with Rosa teaching materials in innovation education with the
help of several institutions that sponsored the work. Gisli says that really that he has been educated
by the children.
Gisli has been very active in technology and in slojd circles in Scandinavian projects, too many to talk
about here.
Rósa Gunnarsdóttir has several hats in this project. First of all she is working with Gill Walsh and
Jonathan Towers in Roundhay and other schools in Leeds in teaching Innovation Education to
children in Young Inventors Societies. Secondly she works for the Iceland University of Education as
an adjunct lecturer and project manager of the InnoEd project, and thirdly she is a research fellow at
University of Leeds working with Cathy Burke on the project and hopefully more research in the field
on Innovation Education.
Rósa started teaching in 1993 with Gisli at Foldaskóli and became active in the development
of Innovation Education early on. In 1997 she stopped teaching and left for Leeds to do a PhD in
Innovation Education, defining the phenomenon, which she finished last December.
Introduction of work plan and peoples responsibilities
Gísli introduced the project and gave people the opportunity to react. He used a Porject information
sheet shown below as an introduction. The information sheet was sent to Brussels as an introduction
of the project which would be made into a booklet made available to all other EU projects and project
participants. Some of you requested this paper to be included in the seminar report as it is short and
concise and a good overview of the aims of the project.
Project’s information sheet
Full Project Title
Acronym
Reference number
Start date
End date
InnoEd: Practical use of ODL and IT in Innovation Education
InnoEd
90138-CP-1-2001-IS-MINERVA-M
Oct 2001
Sept 2003
Summary: (see enclosed example)
InnoEd: Practical use of IT and ODL in Innovation Education is a project dedicated to establishing a
community that nurtures the innovative spirit in children. A niche, where children and adults alike, are
provided with tools and materials, and the necessary interactions for creative thoughts to become
ideas and eventually products.
The project is set up in three stages.
First stage is the culture specific dimension and preparatory stage. Where the work will be aimed at
finding suitable solutions to fit the existing educational surroundings in each country participating.
Building on the existing experience and expertises in each country, sharing those experiences and
structuring a flexible ODL environment for teachers and students and teacher training in the field of
Innovation Education.
The second stage is the dissemination of Innovation Education within each country, training teachers
and setting up learning environments based on the previous stage.
5
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
The third stage is a European dissemination of Innovation Education based on the experience of the
first two stages.
The project is targeted on the European educational system, the teacher trainers, teachers and
students.
The main outputs of the project will be learning and teaching environment linked to a database,
equipped with relevant tools for ideation and Innovation Education.
Categories of projects/sectors:
project mentioned)
(please indicate the group in which you would like to have your
Studies and analysis, information projects
School exchanges / School networks
Higher education exchange/virtual mobility/design and improvement
projects
Teachers and trainers education and development projects
Research and technological development
Special Interest issues: (please indicate whether your project addresses one or several of the
following issues – possibly indicating a contact person, if different from the coordinator)
Special education
Gender dimension
Art, culture, citizenship
Science, technology and society
Language learning
New competencies
Detailed Project Description:
1. Aims/Objectives:
The aim of the project is to set up and develop teaching methods and environment on the internet for
Innovation Education both for teacher training and students.
2. Types of activities:
1. Development of teaching environments and teaching methods for
Teacher training.
2. Student work in Innovation Education.
3. Production of the IT and ODL teaching environments for both above mentioned teaching and
learning processes.
4. Development of the Inventors Competitions.
5. Seminars focused on planning and evaluation of the progress of the project.
6. Conference focusing on dissemination.
3. Specific Target Groups:
The specific target groups of this project are Teacher Training and Schools.
4. Expected Benefits:
The expected benefits of this project will be from the outputs of the project, thus the teaching
materials, the teaching methods and environment developed and tried during the project. The
benefits will be the availability of Innovation Education to a large group of individuals in Europe over
the internet.
5. Dissemination and promotional plans:
Dissemination plans
Stage 1
Teacher training courses within the network
Opening of the Student Platforms
The first competition
Presentations at the following seminars
Iscrat 2002 in Amsterdam in July 2002
6
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Biannual conference in Nizhny Novgorod in Russia July 2002-03-01
Stage 2
The teacher training courses will be opened nationally in the participating countries
As will the Student platforms
The National Young Inventors Competitions will be set up and run
Presentations at seminar and conferences
Not known at the moment EERA is a possibility
Stage 3
Teacher training will be opened to whole of Europe
Student platforms as well
Further National Competitions will be set up as well as the First European Young Inventors
Competition
Presentations at conferences and seminars
First Annual Innovation Education Conference held in UK in August 2004.
6. Tangible products and services, outcomes and results:
ODL teacher training modules at a Inset level, Undergraduate level and/or Masters level
Teaching material and teaching methods for Innovation Education in schools as ODL and IT subjects.
Database and entry environments for Young Inventors Competitions, national and international.
Project’s Web Site address: Innoed.
N.B. The first table below has been completed as an example, in order to harmonise the style
COORDINATOR
Organisation
Address
Tel./fax
e-mail
Role in the Project
Contact Person
Web site
Iceland University of Education
V/Stakkahlíð 105 Reykjavík, Iceland
Tel – 00354 5633800 / fax – 00 5833977
abc@khi.is
Coordinating institution and contributor
Gísli Þorsteinsson
http//www.khi.is
PARTNER
Organisation
Address
Tel./fax
e-mail
Role in the Project
Contact Person(s)
Web site
University of Leeds, School of Education
Woodhouse Lane Leeds LS2 9JT UK, England
Tel 0044113 2431751/ Fax 0044113 2334123
cburke@bretton.ac.uk
Contributor
Dr Cathy Burke
http//www.leeds.ac.uk
PARTNER
Organisation
Address
Tel./fax
e-mail
Role in the Project
Contact Person(s)
Web site
Oulu University
Faculty of Education PL 2000, 90014 OULUN YLIOPISTO, Finland
Tel 0035885534571/Fax 0035885534570
mlindh@ktk.oulu.fi
Contributor
Matti Lindh
http//www.edu.oulu.fi/ktkeng.htm
PARTNER
Organisation
Address
Tel./fax
e-mail
Role in the Project
Foldaskoli
Logafold 1 112 Reykjavik, Iceland
Tel 00354 5672222 / Fax 00354
amb@ismennt.is
Contributor
7
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Contact Person(s)
Web site
Andrea Maja Burgherr
http//foldaskoli.ismennt.is
PARTNER
Organisation
Address
Tel./fax
e-mail
Role in the Project
Contact Person(s)
Web site
Barnaskólinn á Eyrabakka og Stokkseyri
Barnaskólinn á Eyrarbakka og Stokkseyri, 820 Eyrarbakka, Iceland
Tel 00354 483 1141/ Fax 00354 483 1541
bed@ismennt.is
Contributor
Birgir Edwald
http//bes.ismennt.is
PARTNER
Organisation
Address
Tel./fax
e-mail
Role in the Project
Contact Person(s)
Web site
Ringstabekk Skole
Ringstabekk skole, Ringkroken 28, Pb. 23, 1318 Bekkestua, Oslo,
Norge
Tel 0047 675 88 240 / Fax 004767588280
Kjetil_f@yahoo.com
Contributor
Kjetil Fredriksen
http//www.bearum.kommune.no/ringstabekkskole
PARTNER
Organisation
Address
Tel./fax
e-mail
Role in the Project
Contact Person(s)
Web site
Oulun normmaalikoulun yläaste
Kaitoväylä 7 PL 9300, 90014 OULUN YLIOPISTO, Finland
Tel 003588 5533793 / Fax 003588 553 3775
Jarmo.Mustikka@oulu.fi
Contributor
Jarmo Mustikka
http//www.oulu.fi
PARTNER
Organisation
Address
Tel./fax
e-mail
Role in the Project
Contact Person(s)
Web site
SmartVR
Skipholti 50b, Iceland
Tel 00354 590077 / Fax
jon@smartvr.com
Programming
Jón Hörgdal
http//www.smartvr.com
PARTNER
Organisation
Address
Tel./fax
e-mail
Role in the Project
Contact Person(s)
Web site
Skyrr
Ármúla 2, 108 Reykjavík, Iceland
Tel 00354 5695100 / Fax 00354 5695251
joney@ismennt.is
Hosting
Jón Eyfjörð
http//www.skyrr.is
Reactions to Gisli’s introductions took over a lot of the time intended to go over the work plan,
however the reactions were recorded as follows.
Stage 1 Culture Specific
Three platforms
Students
8
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Teachers
Competition
Three levels
School
University
Data base
Stage 2 National
Finland
England
Norway
Iceland
Stage 3 European
Responsibilities
Teachers platform
Content
University people need to use the teachers experiences of using the platform
Must remember to take into account the technical knowledge that is there or
might be lacking
Use
The schools, mostly the teachers
They must come up with suggestions for the further development of the platform as
they are the main users and know best what needs to be made better.
Workspaces for teachers, what do the teachers need as tools in their workspaces
The teachers platform must have two levels
For experienced Innovation Education teachers
For beginners
This platform must have built in a way for us to build up a community of teachers, so
communication devices must be developed and installed.
Toolbox for teachers must be a part of the platform in some way.
Video clips have to be available there as examples of best practise
For teaching purposes for both students and beginner teachers.
Resources need to be addressed
Concepts
Processes
Teacher training
The teacher training that we are going to offer must be flexible
Look at both the classroom teaching and the IT use
Have a take on the facilities needed to do Innovation Education
List the skills required
Which way should we use for the training
Web CT was deemed not very user friendly by the people that have tried it
Maybe we should look into using Blackboard
Use of 3D virtual reality for training
Have set up a perfect classroom in VR for display
Have children present in the teacher training as well
Remember that novelties attract attention
Do we need a coordinator for the room
The issue of access….
This is a very important issue that was raised often in the seminar which we must
take into account before we start work with the children.
Beginners course
It was suggested that Rosa, Gisli, Svanborg and Andrea should set up a beginners
course as soon as possible for the participants in the project.
The materials need to be published as soon as possible
Rosas research as well.
The question of how are we going to keep up the actions on the website and in the
community
Our InnoEd community needs to be closed but further on it needs to be opened in
some way
9
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
The community needs to be simple and functional
We need more materials for teaching Innovation Education
We need agreed timetables for interactions
Use Email for quick and simple interactions
We must remember that a big plus with using ODL is the asymmetry in time
We need to have some kind of overview of the progress of the activity and be able to
archive things
Student platform
Same plan for content and use
One of the biggest problems we have encountered is the lack of feedback to the
children that have taken part in Innovation Education over the net
Another problem is the technological ability of the children we are working with
One problem is language
Should we have a building with a different room for each country
The children need also to have their own little rooms for themselves
Using 3D and the children could construct what they want in their rooms
The rooms need to be in two parts, one for the children to meet someone else, and
one where no one gets into but the child
Use flagging to open up their rooms for activity, allowing people in
Responsibility of the teachers
Legal
Cultural specific
Travel of the teachers and students to other countries
The submission and evaluations dilemma, freedom versus limitations
This is a question of staffing as well
Any changes that the children do on their sites and publish to the open world are on
a time delay so the coordinator or teacher can approve it or reject the display
Everything that the logged on child does is tracked automatically
Access is controlled in a way that everyone needs to be vouched for by an adult
As for content there needs to be a teaching content built in
Tools for drawing
Software for building prototypes
With different materials
Tools that can shape them
A way to collect needs
Processes set up for development of ideas
Just drawing tools for those who want to just draw on two levels
Communal
Individual
We must try to combat the alienation that sometimes happens when you are working
on an idea on you own, but without infringing on the students right to be left alone
with his thoughts
Look for the possibilities not the limitations of ideas
Have a speaker visit the community and their speeches could be saved as avator (a
virtual person) on the website so the children could revisit them, thus archive the
results of the interactions
We must look at the business application of what we are doing
The computer is not the only tool we are using
Have a VR room where the children can take machines apart and put them together
again in novel ways or just in the way they are
How things work software
Competitions
The nature of the competitions
Ethics
Costing
10
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Sideline to the virtual world
Web discussions maybe using Nicenet
Class front
Pairing of schools for the competition or for feed backs
Involvement of parents
The registering allows for management tools to be developed
Linking experts
What about home education
Public access
Costing
Music as a part of Innovation Education
A house for the competition
Music room in VR
Connections
Need to change the application forms
Using post graduates to do the reactions to the children
Finland
The protection of the ideas is in the forefront
This needs to be addressed in the other countries legally
And the Finns provide help for the contestants and directions
They use corporate costing
The roles of ministries of education in each country
The finish entries are very literate
The titles of the competitions
The evaluation process needs to be simpler and see through
Matti Lindh
Innovative Competition and What It Could Be in Technology Education
Innovative action as a mental process seems to be quite a fuzzy phenomenon. No unambiguous
explanation is available. It can therefore be deeply related to situations it is possible to start. One
could say that it is the same as creativity, but creativity can be understood to be a broader concept
comprising e.g. fine arts as well. So, if we make innovations in Technology Education we obviously
do something new to solve some technological problem. At the same time it is a learning process
because of the entity of Technology Education. If we are following the rules of "inventing something
new" and "learning something about technological world", we almost have three types of innovative
action suitable for innovative competition.
1. Closed problems
These seem to be typical of scientific work. One has to create a new formula under certain conditions
or check the calculations for a construction using some new method. If we are applying this
procedure to Technology Education it is obvious that we have to come closer to the world of pupils. In
time sharing we cannot emphasise e.g. hands on activities so much and the result of the innovative
process would be a literary explanation of the phenomenon they have to study.
2. Half open problems
These are the most typical problems in technology and Technology Education. We usually have
something new and advanced. Think about the computer. Every year we have new models with some
new features… we of course have lots of possibilities on the pupils’ level to estimate the aims of the
innovative process. Literary explanation and hands on activities could be in balance, if we demand
them to produce both of them.
3. Open problems
No doubt these sort of problems seem to be easy to organise for a competition. But there are plenty
of difficulties involving the evaluation of the results of the competition. If the pupils can define what
11
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
they will produce, how can we be sure that the competition is fair? Some rules must therefore be set
before the competition.
* The rule of security:
Everyone must be sure that invention he/she has found is protected for his/her use only. Only he/she
can decide the destiny of the invention.
* The rule of acceptability:
Because there are no limitations on the area of innovation, all inventions are accepted for the
competition. The only limitation is that it really has to be an innovation. Actually, as a result of this
rule, solutions to both closed problems and half open problems are accepted to the competition.
* The rule of functionality:
It is not enough to preview an innovation without any concrete product. The innovator shall be able to
show how it functions in the real situation to which it is dedicated.
* The rule of educativeness:
It is easy to obey this rule, because innovative action is educative in itself. Still, if the learner has
made exactly similar things before, it cannot be an innovation and thereby educative in the sense at
which we are aiming. So, the teachers controlling the pupils’ action shall be especially aware of this
rule.
As shown before, the success of the competition is highly dependent on how it is set up. If the
atmosphere in which the competition is declared is encouraging, it is easy to launch a creative
process.
The role of the teacher where does the children’s idea end???
12
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Experiences of Innovation Education teachers
Rosa, Andrea and Svanborg
Role of the teacher
Problem with not being able to follow up all ideas
The importance of having a good active list of needs
Mental inhibitions
The other teachers, their lack of interest in the project
Problem with getting the children active
Time
All kids involved
Management of everything
Keeping an open mind
The teacher as a creative person
Ask questions
Role of the student
Knowing how to work
The validity of ideas
Needs
Starting with storyline
Layers of learning
lifespan
Role of Environments
Giving the right ethos
Loosing the focus of having to be creative just do it
The democratic way of working
Welcome all ideas
ETHICS
13
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Results of the seminar work.
The progress of human resources
We start with 15 to 18 of us
We need to educate pilot groups in all countries during the school year 2002-2003
Size in each country needs to differ, but at least 12 – 14 pilot teachers ready for 2003-2004
We could use the KHI ODL teaching platform for that, as it is tried and tested and there should not be
any problems in setting up a inset program for interested teacher through there. The problem might
be fees.
Rosa will look into that. And training course will be up and ready for next autumn.
The school year 2003-2004 each country UK, Finland, Iceland and Norway will have their own ODL
courses up and running.
Time Line
Immediately after Iceland seminar
GISLI – will set up our own communication site – email.
JONATHAN – 3D Student platform development
GISLI – Talking to programmers about our needs
By Mid April
ROSA - Report of Iceland seminar sent out to everyone
GISLI Teaching materials – videos by 15th April (hmm what teaching materials???)
(possible use of media students)
30th April Competition entries for Icelandic competition – closing date
GILSI AND THE JON’S By May 1st – Data Base needs to be sorted
ROSA – will find out from Iceland University of Education how we can use ODL facilities for teacher
training – by 1st June.
Late June - ROSA & CATHY – seminar presentation School of Education, Leeds.
ROSA Translated teaching material By 1st August (seek publishing opportunities in translation)
GISLI JONATHAN Student Platform web – by 13th August
By September 2002 - CATHY, ROSA, GILL, MATTI, GISLI, KJETTEL –
ROSA & GISLI – content of teacher training web.dissemination / recruitment of interested teachers
September – October.
Competition preparation:
Finland – TUULA & THOMAS
UK - CATHY & ROSA
Norway – GISLI & KJETEL
Iceland ????
19th October – evaluation of competition complete. Announcement of winners.
October – start national competitions entries
EVERYBODY - By Dec 1st – email personal /individual report to Rosa – 3-4 A4 pages
Leeds Seminar – 22/01/03 – 26/01/03
By 30 April 2003 – National competition entr. Evaluation complete.
18th October 2003 – Close of national competitions.
14
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Results of the Competitions Group
Tuula, Toumas. Cathy and Gisli
Age groups
I
under 8
II
from 8 to 12
III
from 12 to 16
Dates
1.10.2002 – 30.4.2003
18.10.2003
18.10. – 1.11.2003
21.2.2004
National contests
Evaluation (national level)
Results of a national contest
Deadline for EU contest
(national organizer are responsible)
Evaluation (independent group, International Inventors)
Results of the EU contest
Evaluation of ideas
- should be practical
- deal with the real world
- solve real, practical problem
- serve the world
- have some market value
Prizes
1st, 2nd and 3rd in each category
Number of entries of each participating country is 9 in the EU competition
Web-page of a national contest
- same layout in each country (colors, logo)
Registration
- School and a contact person (teacher)
- Kids
Registration form for schools
- After registration a teacher will receive an e-mail confirming the registration
- Information about school; name, address, phone and fax number and e-mail address
- Contact person; name, address and e-mail address
- Possibility to choose username and password (max. 8 digits)
Registration form for kids
- Name
- Sex: male/female
- Age (selection list for date, month and year)
- School (list of registered schools in each country), no school/home educated –option
- Address (address, postal code, city), phone and e-mail address
- Possibility to choose username and password (max. 8 digits), re-enter password
Submission form for competition
- Name of idea
- Classification
o IN (New ideas and inventions)
o DE (Design and functions)
o SO (Software)
- Co-authors (name of members of a team if involved)
- How did you get the idea?
- Describe the idea (function, design and application)
15
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
-
Include your pictures/drawings (.gif or .jpg)
INFO Information about InnoEd
- How to take part
- Contact information (national)
- List of registered schools
etc.
REG
-
Registration
Schools/teachers
Kids
NAT
-
National information
Exhibitions
Press releases
FinnoEd – a national contest
INFO
REG
NAT
LOGO
LINKS
IN
LINKS
- Organizers and sponsors
- Technology education
- Innovation education
etc.
Username
Password
IN
-
“A slogan or
a short description”
Registration completed previously
Teachers (access on instructions and supporting material)
Kids (personal area and competition)
16
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
The results from the Teacher training group
Jarmo, Matti, Matti, Gill, Birgir, Bodvar and Rosa
Local training
Flexible training
Different scale, one day seminars and week seminars
Training the pilots for dissemination
This needs to be a bit open ended at the first stage, meaning that you can take part in
training not deciding until later if you want to use it for a diploma or a postgraduate study.
Content of local training needs to take aim of
Technical ability of teachers
Content specific knowledge
Didactic, Methodology, Practial Knowledge
Dissemination tactics
Local training could become parts of PGCE, Undergraduate studies, INSET and research
program.
Resources and tools
Teaching materials need to be translated and distributed
Videos
First phase use our things we already have and DIY a bit
More professional videos need to be produced later
And dubbed for teachers and kids.
Think of the development of the human resources we have
Certification of the teacher trainers and others
Web training
Best results are a combination of both web and local training
KHI could be the pioneering grounds for the pilot program in Innovation Education
Next step would be to move over to other nations
Find a suitable way for EU certification
The teachers tools
Web space communication system
Use Ismennt postlist
Resource center on the web
Official web
Basic list of things we need to set up Innovation Education
Include things from and for the Crafts room
Computer programs
Ideas for programs
Canvas, Mind Map, Inspiration, Smart Technology, PCB Wizard, Control
Studio, Jonathans idea, and use of Pads and computer pens.
Needs we have as the founding group
Communication system
Counters
Website
Email
European school net
Needs of the Pilot Group
European school net
Smart VR technology
Drawing programs
17
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Results of the student platform group.
Jonathan, Jona, Kjetil,
Need
s
Student platform Website
My Ideas
Homepage
Printable
Personal Space
Protected by password
Links
Search engine
Solutions
2D drawing
3D drawing
Music
Need of the
Week
Evaluation of first seminar:
The aim of the seminar was to introduce the participants to each other and form the platform from
where the project could grow. As can be seen from the results shown above that was accomplished.
18
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Seminar 2 First phase piloting
Place: University of Leeds/Roundhay Technology College
Chair of Seminar: Rosa Gunnarsdottir
Time: 22 – 25.01.04
Agenda:
Date: Wednesday 22. 01.03
Aims: Practicalities and IT status, primary reports
Place: Roundhay School
Chair: Cathy Burke
Time
9:00
Title
Welcome and practicalities
Presenter
Gill Walsh
9:10
Welcome and the itinerary for the week
Cathy Burke
9:20
Interim report and Budget
Rosa Gunnardottir
10:00
10:30
Break and wander around the school
Introduction of MARK 2 of InnoEd workshops
12:00
13:00
Lunch, buffet at Roundhay School
Report from Foldaskoli
13:30
14:30
Kerr Mackie
Report from Barnaskolinn a Eyrarbakka og Stokkseyri
15:00
16:00
Report from Brautarholts og Gnupverjaskola
Roundup
Date: Thursday 23.01.03
Aims: Secondary reports and HE
Place: CLC
Chair: Rosa Gunnarsdottir
Time
Title
9:00
Welcome
9:15
Ringstabekk
Rosa Gunnarsdottir
Robert Bennett
Andrea Burgherr
and Iris
Gudlaugsdottir
School visit
Jona Bjork
Jonsdottir and Katrin
Osk Thrainsdottir
Svanborg Jonsdottir
Cathy Burke
Presenter
Rosa
Kjetil Fredriksen and Bergliot
Vatnar
Matti Hasari, Jarmo Mustikka
9:45
Oulu
10:15
Break
10:45
Roundhay
Jonathan Towers and Gill Walsh
12:30
Roundup
Rosa Gunnarsdottir
Buffet Lunch at the CLC
FREE TIME
On offer will be:
a walking trip on the Ilkley Moor, with a very knowledgeable local guide ora trip into
Leeds city Centre
5:00
KHI (HE)/Leeds
Rosa Gunnarsdottir/Cathy Burke
6:00
Guest Presenter
Dr Kevin Byron
Seminar Dinner
19
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Date: Friday 24.01.03
Aims: Resources and dissemination, competitions
Place: CLC
Chair: Svanborg Jonsdottir
10:00
Welcome
10:15
FinnoEd Finland
10:45
NKG Iceland
11:15
YIS UK
11:45
Introduction of Stavanger University to InnoEd
12:30
Lunch
1:30
Resources and dissemination
Jarmo Mustikka
Gisli Thorsteinsson
Cathy Burke
Haakon Landraak
Workshop
Date: Saturday 25.01.03
Aims: Roundup and planning
Place: Roundhay school
Chair: Gill Walsh
9:00
Welcome
9:15
Group work
12:00
Lunch
13:00
Planning
16:00
Finnish
Results of seminar
The reports from each institution gave an insight into the experiences of the end users of the product
of the project. These reports pointed out triumphs and problems identified by teachers and students
alike and suggested solutions and the next steps in the progression.
Examples of the reports can be found on the CD-ROM accompanying the final report.
Evaluation:
The aims of the seminar were achieved, as the reports gave quite a lot of insight into the status of the
piloting and suggestions for further development.
20
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Seminar 3 Second phase piloting
Place: Oulu University Time: 06- 08.11.2003
Chair of Seminar: Jarmo Mustikka
Agenda:
Thursday 06.11. 2003
Theme: Where are we ?
Chair: Matti Lindh
Secretary: Jona Jonsdottir
10.00
10.20
11.00
11.30
12.00
15.00
16.00
16.30
Welcome to Oulu and University of Oulu
Headmaster Eija Kumpulainen
Things to know
Jarmo, Matti and Matti
- accommodation
- schedules
- transportation
- free time
Where we are now; the state of the project
Gisli Thorsteinsson
Lunch
Visit to faculty of education and primary teacher training school
( coffee including )
Greetings from coordinator
Svanborg Jonsdottir
Presentations: Markku Lang
Norssiportti - portaali
Eija Kumpulainen
Minerva project News in Europe
Timo Tiusanen Technology education in Finland
Matti Lindh
Technology Education as an
area to make innovations
Evening at the house of Teachers association of Oulu
Dinner and sauna included
Also possibility to make presentations and discussions
Friday 07.11. 2003-10-01
”Theme” Use of Innoed web and VR
What we have done since Leeds and plans from the participants for using the workshops and
taking part in the competition
Chair: Svanborg Jonsdottir
Secretary: Katrin Thrainsdottir
09.00 Iceland- Report from Foldasskoli: Andrea Burgherr and Iris Gudlaugsdottir
- Eyrarbakka: Birgir Edwald, Katrin Thrainsdottir, Jona
Jonsdottir
10.00 Norway
- University of Stavanger: Haakon Landraak
10.30 UK
- Rounhay school: Jonathan Towers
11.30
Visit at Lintulampi Primary School
13.00 Lunch
13.30 Finland
- Teacher training school of Oulu: Jarmo Mustikka, Matti Hasari
14.00 Discussion
15.00 Coffee
15.30 City of Oulu
19.00 Dinner at Ramada Hotel Oulu
Saturday 08.11.2003
“Theme”
What have to be done ?
Conference in Leeds
Chair: Birgir Edwald
Secretary: Andrea Burgherr
09.00
10.30
Visit to Schoolcentre in Kello
Groupworks from :
21
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
11.30
12.00
14.00
17.00
conference ( Matti Lindh )
VR ( Gisli Thorsteinsson )
competition ( Tuomas Lehtinen )
materials to teachers ( Jarmo Mustikka)
materials and learning environments for pupils
(Jonathan Towers)
dissemination (Matti Hasari)
prochyres, posters from IE ( Svanborg Jonsdottir )
information to the PRESS (Tuula Pihlajamaa)
Lunch
Groupwork presentations
Workshop from web and Vr, by Gisli Thorsteinsson
Brainstorming about the future
Evening in Virpiniemi forest
Result of seminar
The reports form the participants affirmed the progression of the project and identified problems in the
running of the database in relation to the competitions and the open and distance learning for each
country. These were scheduled to be addressed as soon as possible.
Evaluation
The aims of the seminar were met, in addition to strengthening the result of the participants to take
the project further after the EU funding runs out.
Seminar 4 Evaluation of project, Final Report
Place: University of Leeds
Time: 7 July 2004
Chair of Seminar: Rósa Gunnardóttir
Agenda:
9:00 – 12:00 Report Presentations by participating Institutions
Lunch
13:00 – 14:00 Budget discussion
14:00 – 16:00 Final judging of the EU competition
Results of this final seminar of the InnoEd project can be seen in the final report. Each institution has
exceeded the framework that was put forward in the detailed work plans, the project has evolved and
grown both nationally and internationally and shows potential as an international entity within
education.
Evaluation:
The final seminar met the aims set. The results of the participants can be seen in on the CD-ROM
attached to the final report.
22
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
First International InnoEd Conference
Report: The First International Innovation Education Conference, ‘Technologies of Learning:
Dimensions of Flexibility and Creativity for Preferable Futures.’
Dr Catherine Burke (Chair of Conference)
The Conference met from 8th until 10th July, at the University of Leeds, UK.
Objectives
The Conference was designed to enable Innovation Education and the use of ICT to be explored
within the context of woder practice and interest in encouraging and enhancing creativity in learning
contexts. The Innoed project established important and lasting links between the school, teacher
training and research sectors and the Conference made these links more apparent with papers
presented by classroom teachers, head teachers of schools, teacher trainers and others in academia.
The question of whether the use of ICT can support and / or enhance innovation education in schools
was a central plank of the conference.
Delegates
In total 64 delegates attended the three days of the conference. The countries represented included
the UK, US, Australia, Iceland, Norway, Finland, Ireland, Saudi Arabia, Oman. Keynotes were drawn
from the US, the UK and Iceland.
Programme
The programme was organised around the following themes which emerged from the call for papers.











How the built environment can permit creativity and innovation
The use of IT or ODL in enhancing creativity / inventiveness /
Eco-Literacy and Eco-preneurship
Flexible use of time and space: reshaping the school curriculum
Teacher training and creativity
Pupil / parent participation in changing schools
Non-traditional learning spaces: museums / parks / eco-centres as spaces for innovation and
creativity
Measuring innovation
Pupil enterprises
Visual and spatial literacy
Legal frameworks for children and young people as inventors and entrepreneurs.
Keynotes:


Bruce Jilk, Architect and School Designer from Minnesota
Bruce is a leading visionary in the way that schools can be designed as permissive learning
spaces. He has designed schools in 30 countries and is concerned with the challenge of how
to blend learning environments with community to encourage new learning methodologies.
Rosa Gunnarsdottir, Project Coordinator (E.U. funded) Open and Distance Learning and
Innovation Education
Rosa is a research fellow at the University of Leeds, School of Education. Rosa began her
teaching career as a science teacher in Iceland. She lead the development of teaching and
learning resources for Innovation Education which is now part of the Icelandic National
Curriculum. She went on to complete a Ph.D on Innovation Education: Defining the
Phenomenon
23
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA

Keri Facer, Director of Learning Research at NESTA Futurelab
Previously, Keri spent four years as researcher and lecturer at Bristol University's Graduate
School of Education, where she continues to be a visiting fellow. Here she worked on a range
of major innovative research projects, including ESRC projects Screen Play and InterActive
Education. She has published widely in the field of children's digital cultures, with a particular
focus on how young people use and learn with digital technologies in the home.
Papers.
Papers were presented in two concurrent sessions enabling delegates to hear and respond to two or
three papers while all delegates were enabled to attend three keynotes and two plenaries. One
plenary focussed on the question of how to promote the teaching and learning of visual literacy in
schools and what the role of virtual learning environments is in the future of schooling. The other final
plenary focussed on the future of the Innovation Education project internationally.
Prospects
The conference organisers are in negotiation with appropriate educational journals and will pursue
the possibility of publishing the best papers from the conference in a special issue in the near future.
The conference has strengthened networks of interested individuals and the links will be maintained
through the active and purposeful use of academic discussion lists.
Conference evaluation.
Comments from delegates were sought and these are universally positive.
A selection of comments post conference follows:
‘I have to say that it was the best conference I have been to for many years. Not just because of the
interesting and challenging formal sessions but because of the interesting, challenging and
thoroughly nice people there. It was the opportunity to make many contacts which I shall be following
up soon.
Many thanks to yourself and all the other hardworking organisers – I look forward to the next one.’
‘thanks again for the sessions; I enjoyed them all, challenging. Sorry I couldn't stay longer, as i also
really enjoyed the informal stuff. You've got together a good group here. Look forward to next year.’
‘Just a quick note to say how much I enjoyed the conference and how nice it was to meet you both!
I'm thinking about
possibly doing an international symposium on 'creative' approaches to teaching and learning and its
relations to community development and regeneration sometime next year - it would be great to have
some input from your various projects. I will keep you posted.’
‘It was a really good conference - not too many people, a lot of ideas and a good mixture of interests
and enthusiasms’
‘It was enjoyable to be in a different space at the conference (rather than on the consultancy
research/evaluation treadmill) and hear what others are doing/thinking and to be sparked in thinking
more intentionally about innovation ...’
A book of abstract of papers presented follows as an appendix to this seminar and conference report.
Conclusion
The overall conclusion regarding the running and the results of the InnoEd seminar and conference is
that they did indeed meet the targets and aims set out in the detailed work plan of the InnoEd project.
The group of participants that started out this project four years ago, dreaming up plans to develop a
pedagogically viable way of conducting Innovation Education classes using the technology available,
crossing borders and time, has achieved a lot of the goals set. However as with most projects and
products, when the last nail is hammered in and the last screw is fastened, new perspectives are
unearthed, new technologies come forward with promises of more goals.
24
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
So even though this project is coming to a close, new horizons await new challenges and new
beginnings.
25
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
InnoEd Conference
University of Leeds
8 – 10 July 2004
Keynote Paper
Title: Innovation Education, defining the concept and exploring the practice .....................29
By: Rosa Gunnarsdottir ......................................................................................................29
Parallel Papers
InnoEd Research:
Title: Use of online facilities in InnoEd …………………………………………………………….
By: Gisli Thorsteinsson ……………………………………………………………………………..
Title: Innovation Education: Influencing Factors …………………………………………………
By: Svanborg R Jonsdottir ……………………………………………………………………….…
Title: Masters Project ………………………………………………………………………………..
By: Jona Bjork Jonsdottir ……………………………………………………………………………
Teachers' Perspective:
Title: Innovation outside the Curriculum …………………………………………………………
By: Jonathan Towers ………………………………………………………………………………
Title: Evaluating Innovation Education in Classrooms ………………………………………….
By: Iris Gudlaugsdottir ………………………………………………………………………………
Title: "This time next year, we'll all be millionaires!" ……………………………….………….. 4
By: Elisabeth Harrison ………………………………………………………………………..……4
Teachers Perspective
Title: How do trainee primary teachers understand creativity?
By: Alan Howe, Dan Davies, Melanie Fasciato and Maggie Rogers School of Education Bath Spa
University …………………………………………………………………………………….. 5
Title: Teacher Training and Creativity - non-traditional learning and spaces ...................30
By: Celia Burgess-Macey ...............................................................................................30
Title: Creating a "Perception of Need": encouraging creative thinking in pre-service
teachers
and design students …………………………………………………………….…...... 30
By: Claire Gallagher ……………………………………………………………………….....…… 30
IT, VR and Music
Title: DrumSteps – Case Studies in Percussion Composition .........................................31
By: Kevin Jennings ........................................................................................................31
Title: Invisible Visuals Discussions
Title: Steps to Parnassus - A Platform for Computer-Mediated Creativity ……………….. 8
By: Mark Johnson ………………………………………………………………………………. 8
Title: VR in Education
By: Jon Horddal
26
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Keynote Paper:
Title: Contingency and Place Making for Learning. ............................................................33
Speaker: Bruce A Jilk .........................................................................................................33
Parallel Papers
Alternative Sites of Education
Title: Museums and historic properties for innovation education ……………….…………… 8
By: Robin Clutterbuck …………………………………………………… …………….……… 8
Title: Creative Minds ……………………………………………………………………………… 9
By: Helen Barraclough and Becky Bracy ………………………………………………………. 9
Title: Ignite! identifying and supporting exceptionally creative young people ……………..… 10
By: Rick Hall
Children in Cities
Title: “Our Town”: Inner-city children as Visual and Spatial Learners ………………………. 10
By: Claire Gallagher School of Education Georgian Court University New Jersey ……… 10
Title: Children in Cities ………………………………………………………………………………
By: Barry Percy-Smith ………………………………………………………………………………
Innovation in the Classroom
Title: Innovations in teamwork; experiences in teaching Physics in grades 5 and 6 ............35
By: Sivbritt Dumbrajs (with S. Bergström-Nyberg, B. Federley, A. Glader, K. Helle and M.
Rosenblad) ..........................................................................................................................35
Title: Natures innovations and the creative use of analogy …………………………………….
By: Jane Turner and Kevin Byron …………………………………………………………………
Title: Using ‘ICT-supported’ action research as an approach to teacher professional development
……………………………………………………………………………………… 11
By: Steve Higgins and Kate Wall Centre for Learning and Teaching University of Newcastle
Inventing Learning Spaces
Title: The Do It Yourself School: E. F. O’Neill of Prestolee ……………………………….… 11
By: Cathy Burke ……………………………………………………………………….…………. 11
Title: Innovative Classrooms for All Children ......................................................................362
By: Kathy Irwin ....................................................................................................................362
Title: Virtual Classrooms and the persistence of recitation …………………………….…… 12
By: Rob Walker ……………………………………………………………………………………12
Children's Agendas
Title: Revealing children's capabilities through ICT for those with SEN ……………..……. 12
By: Helen May …………………………………………………………………………………… 12
Title: Online resources of parents
By: Jona Bjork Jonsdottir
Title: The need for flexible heads ……………………………………………………………... 13
By: Birgir Edwald …………………………………………………………………………………13
Title: Student enterprises: an arena for renewing school curriculum, methods and parents'
participation in changing schools ………………………………………………………………...
By: Haakon Landraak ………………………………………………………………………………
27
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Nurturing Creativity
Title: Creating new cultures of learning in schools: lessons from the Children’s Fund ........17
By: Barry Percy-Smith .........................................................................................................41
Title: Creativity workshops: nurturing talent or just exercising it? ……………………………… 18
By: Kevin Byron …………………………………………………………………………………... 18
Keynote Paper
Title: Creative collaborations in the design of technologies for learning: a Futurelab perspective
……………………………………………………………………………………….. 18
By: Keri Facer ……………………………………………………………………………………...18
Parallel Papers
Institutional Innovation
Title: Measuring organisation readiness for innovation: the learning organisation framework
Ghazi Alkhatib ……………………………………………………………………………….. 18
By:
Title: Instituting Total Innovation ……………………………………………………………..…. 20
By: Omar Al-Humaidi …………………………………………………………………………….. 20
Title: About the relation between Innovation Education and Technology Education -an .. 20
example concerning Technology Oriented Teacher Education
By: Matti Lindh
Creativity in Teaching
Title:
By: Jarmo Mustikka
Title: Creativity ……………………………………………………………………………… ..… 30
By: Matti Hasari …………………………………………………………………………………. 30
Title: What creativity isn't - questioning clarity ………………………………………………... 31
By: Howard Gibson ………………………………………………………………………………. 31
Teacher's Perspective
Title: How to incorporate entrepreneurship and innovation in teacher training …………….
By: Haakon Landraak …………………………………………………………………………….
Title: Teacher education, creativity and ICT: one antipodean perspective …………………. 31
By: Anthony Jones …………………………………………………………………………...…… 31
Title: Creativity In the Curriculum: what does this mean and why is it so important? ……... 32
By: Emma Watson ………………………………………………………………………………… 32
Technology and innovation
Title: Models of ‘creative partnership’: implications for teachers, institutions and curriculum
management …………………………………………………………………………………….... 32
By: Graham Jeffery Newham Sixth Form College University of East London ……………. 32
Title: Simulations as mental tools for network-based group learning in innovation and electronics
technology ……………………………………………………………………………. 33
By: Tom Page, Miika Lethonen, Gisli Thorsteinsson ……………………………………………33
Title: Independent watershed assessment project(s) …………………………………………… 33
By: Frederic R Wilson ……………………………………………………………………………… 33
28
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Keynote Paper:
Title: Innovation Education, defining the concept and exploring the practice
By: Rosa Gunnarsdottir School of Education University of Leeds
Defining a social phenomenon such as education is beneficial for practise. Over the 14 years that
Innovation Education has been practised, it has been defined by the participants in the situations, the
practitioners of Innovation Education.
Innovation Education can be defined using theoretical frameworks and empirical evidence, but now
we need to look beyond that and see how this phenomenon can develop and has established itself in
different communities, with different practitioners and in different cultural climates.
The presentation will focus on Innovation Education as it presents itself in the different social
circumstances within the InnoEd project. The concept of Innovation Education will be explored as
well as practical representations explained and illustrated. Some of the main questions regarding
theoretical underpinnings that have emerged through the work will be highlighted, with emphasis on
understanding of roles and agendas of the participants. Further more future plans of InnoEd will be
suggested and the discussion about possible and preferable futures of the phenomenon explored.
Parallel Papers:
Title: “This time next year we’ll all be millionaires!”
By: Elisabeth Harrison Year 5 Teacher Roundhay St John’s Primary School
Roundhay St John’s Primary School Young Inventors’ Society has been running successfully in Year
4 and 5 for eighteen months. The children have had the opportunity to think of needs, invent
solutions, design them, make them and enter them in competitions. The emphasis for the children is
on being able to invent anything they see a need for; the emphasis for adults is to step back, allow
the children to have weird and wonderful ideas and not to interfere! This isn’t easy! Adults want to
say “That won’t work!” “How will you do it?” “Do you know what you’re doing?” but the children just
get on with it. They’ve won prizes, made a video, presented their ideas to the school and had a
prototype made at Eureka! Museum. The whole experience has shown us how much children’s
creativity should be valued and encouraged. After all, they do know what they’re doing …!
Title: How do trainee primary teachers understand creativity?
By: Alan Howe, Dan Davies, Melanie Fasciato and Maggie Rogers School of Education Bath
Spa University
This paper draws upon findings from research undertaken in three UK primary teacher-training
providers as part of the ‘Creative Teachers for Creative Learners’ project, funded by a Research and
Development Award from the Teacher Training Agency. The project aims to support the
development of primary trainees’ understanding of – and teaching for - children’s creativity. The
project team comes from three providers of Initial Teacher Training (ITT): Bath Spa University
College, Goldsmiths College, University of London and Manchester Metropolitan University.
The project team has been exploring current understandings and perceptions of creativity in primary
education by drawing on a range of sources of evidence: the perceptions of undergraduates and
Post-Graduates on ITT courses, observations by trainees of teacher-mentors’ practice, the
perceptions of head teachers, a survey of ITT courses and an analysis of course elements designed
to develop trainees’ understanding of creativity.
Examples of the research activities that inform this paper are;
29
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
At Bath Spa University College, primary PGCE trainees have been set a directed task in schools
during which they select lessons from two curriculum areas to observe – one which they expect to
offer scope for creativity and another which they judge to lack creative potential. They have evaluated
the support offered for children’s creativity in each subject area using a framework drawn from
Harrington’s ‘creative ecosystem’ (1990) and the analysis shows they have frequently found their
preconceptions challenged.
At Goldsmiths' College PGCE and Year 1 BA (Ed) students are looking at creative approaches to
teaching through Carnival workshops. The use of digital video to record and reflect on processes
experienced during the workshops are being piloted by tutors in art, design and technology, ICT and
performing arts as well as during the Carnival workshops.
At Manchester Metropolitan University undergraduate trainees have completed a questionnaire that
explores their concept of creativity in two senses; what is creativity and how does creativity manifest
itself in primary schools? In addition they have produced a cartoon to express their own notion of the
creative person. This has produced some interesting outcomes with regard to where opportunities for
creativity can be found.
Data from a number of components of the project will feature in the presentation of this paper.
References
Harrington, D. M.(1990) ‘The Ecology of Human Creativity: A psychological perspective’, in Runco, M.
A. and Albert, R. S. (eds.) Theories of Creativity. London. Sage Publications.
Title: Teacher Training and Creativity-non-traditional learning and spaces
By: Celia Burgess-Macey Department of Educational Studies Goldsmiths
This paper starts from the premise that creativity and culture are inextricably related as described in
'All Our Futures'. It engages with the issue of the under-representation of the histories, lived
experiences and cultural and artistic practices of black communities-specifically the African Caribbean
communities- in the ITT and school curricula.
It describes the process of introducing a carnival arts module onto the teacher training programmes at
Goldsmiths College. Students work in non- traditional ways in partnership with leading carnival arts
practitioners in masquerade, Caribbean dance and calypso. Students also record their work on video
and digital camera, reflect on their learning and present their findings.
In the weeks following the course groups of students are allocated to work in those schools in south
London who are already developing carnival arts.
The paper will explore students initial conceptions/misconceptions of carnival and their initial
expectations of the workshops. This will be compared with their reflections on their own learning
processes and on the learning of children in schools. The outcomes for particular groups of
students/children and the wider implications for the current curriculum and pedagogical approaches in
schools will be examined.
Title: Creating a "Perception of Need": encouraging creative thinking in pre-service teachers
and design students
By: Claire Gallagher School of Education Georgian Court University New Jersey
The process of teaching pre-service teachers and design students is remarkably analogous in that in
neither case can the instructor direct the learner in an autocratic manner. Each of these processes is
distinctly Constructivist in nature and the "teacher" must become a designer of cognitive
apprenticeships into which his/her students can step and "live" without fear of failure. Over time, a
"Perception of Need" results though which motivation to learn through experience and reflection
occurs. the focus is on the process, rather than the product and, as a result, a shift in both perception
and instruction results. This paper will present examples of this process in university classes in
30
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
teaching and design, and will attempt to create a framework for future development of curricula meant
to encourage creative thinking.
Title: DrumSteps – Case Studies in Percussion Composition
By: Kevin Jennings Centre For Research in IT in Education Department of Computer Science
Trinity College Dublin
DrumSteps was designed by Kevin Jennings, James Bligh and Conor Mc Carthy at the Centre for
Research in IT in Education at Trinity College Dublin. It is a screen-based virtual environment, which
allows the user to build sets of steps and produce percussion sounds by dropping balls down the
steps. The system embodies the full range of rhythmic/percussive concepts including pulse, tempo,
measure, timbre, texture, ostinato, syncopation, accent, anacrusis etc.
Fig 1. DrumSteps Screen Shot (Java version)
31
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Drumsteps exists in two versions, a standalone Java version available from
(http://www.cs.tcd.ie/James.Bligh/DrumSteps/) and a web-based Shockwave version. The
Shockwave version is currently available to the public via the BBC website
(www.bbc.co.uk/music/aod/drumsteps_launcher.shtml). Both versions may be used in single user
mode. The Java software supports web-based multi-user synchronous collaboration, while the
Shockwave version enables asynchronous collaborative activity via inbuilt email ‘save and send’
functionality.
The proposed presentation will demonstrate the software and present an overview of a number of
case studies of children in the 10-12 year age range using the software to compose percussion music
over multiple sessions. It will include examples of childrens work and digital video footage of children
using the software. Based on these cases, a number of issues will be discussed including;




What is an appropriate research methodology with which to study technology mediated creative
activity, and how does the technology itself facilitate this study?
How do we assess technology-mediated learning, especially with regard to process vs product
and randomness vs intent?
What is an appropriate teaching methodology in working with computer mediated composition?
Arising from the above, what are the important design features of software to enable childrens
music composition?
About the Author
Kevin Jennings is a musician, teacher and music educator. He has over fifteen years experience in
music education in both Ireland and the USA including a variety of school appointments and has
worked with many childrens orchestras, choirs and other performing groups. He is currently Media
Lab Europe Research Fellow at the Centre for Research in I.T. in Education (CRITE) at Trinity
College Dublin investigating the application of technology to music learning and teaching.
Title: Invisible Visuals Discussions
INVISIBLE VISUALS
The emphasis on literacy in recent years has focused almost entirely on
the written word, despite the fact that learning materials are increasingly
dominated by visual images, whether in print, on-screen or in displays
and exhibitions. There is research evidence to suggest that children have
trouble with some texts because they cannot interpret visual images.
This discussion, which will use examples but not involve presented papers, will
therefore start from the following questions:
 How visually literate are children, and how can we tell?
 How is visual literacy fostered in the classroom, and at home?
 Is there a 'grammar' of visual design? Can it be taught?
 What might help children to become more visually aware?
 Could innovative teaching materials make a difference? What would they
look like?
 How important is it today to incorporate into teacher training an understanding of the ‘visual
culture’ of school?
The panel will consist of Alan Peacock, Rob Walker, Claire Gallagher, Jon Prosser
Title: Steps to Parnassus – A Platform for Computer-Mediated Creativity
By: Mark William Johnson Bolton Institute
32
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Bolton Institute’s ‘Steps to Parnassus’ software presents a novel approach to computer-mediated creativity in the
classroom. It aims to use a computer game idiom to stimulate creativity in music, writing and
graphics. This paper reflects on a recent pilot study in which a group of 44 children used the software.
Whilst the software is ‘work in progress’, the pilot study presents valuable material for examination by
semioticians, constructivists and aestheticians alike. A brief theoretical discussion pursues these
areas and in particular the effect of the game interface. The conclusion acknowledges the speculative
nature of the theoretical discussion, but highlights the relevance of such speculations in mapping the
territory for further software development and evaluation.
Keynote Paper:
Title: Contingency and Place Making for Learning.
By: Bruce A Jilk Architect and School Designer Minnesota
Recent research on learning has increased the range of strategies available to enable diverse and
more individualized approaches in education. Many tools and resources have evolved in order to
support this change. However, one of the major components in the learning experience, the learning
environment, has essentially remained unchanged. The traditional school building has been designed
to efficiently (a quantity measure) serve an ideal student. This “one size fits all” approach grew out of
era dominated by an assembly line mentality. Every classroom and lab became specialized and
inflexible. Today learning, in order to be more effective (a quality measure), requires a greater variety
of resources. For learning environments to be more accommodating they need to be less specialized
and more customizable by the learners. Yesterday’s schools are over designed.
This presentation is about expanding the possibilities for learning and learning environments. Just as
meaningful learning reflects the cultural and ecological issues of our era, meaningful settings need to
reflect this new context. Evolving from the creative dimensions of learning, these new possibilities
enable creative learning. Grounded in a solid relationship to their communities, these new
environments are characterized by a strong sense of place. They also require the engagement of the
learner to be complete.
Today’s schools need to be under designed.
Parallel Papers:
Title: Museums and historic properties as venues for Innovation Education
By: Robin Clutterbuck White Rook Consultancy Devon
After many years as a ‘poor relation’ to curatorial rôles, learning has been recognised over the past
five years as a central function of museums and historic properties, as demonstrated by the plethora
of government funded museum education initiatives.
Such venues are ideal for Innovation Education, providing opportunities for interaction with real
historical items and spaces.
The paper will look at examples of Innovation Education in museums, religious buildings, historic
houses and archaeological sites across the UK. These will include works of art as catalysts for
spiritual awareness in religious sites, rôle play and music making in historic houses, the use of
handling collections in museums and problem solving on historic sites using archaeological
techniques.
It will also consider the theoretical background to constructivist learning styles through the work of
Howard Gardner and George Hein, among others.
The paper will look at the balance between formal and informal learning approaches and will argue
that such activities cannot be achieved in schools, but need the context of the historic space.
33
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
It will consider the training needs for non specialists working in these venues and the rôle for
educationalists in advancing the agenda nationally and internationally.
Robin Clutterbuck is a consultant specialising in learning in museums and historic properties. As a
teacher he made active and extensive use of the historic environment before moving ‘into the field’,
setting up an award winning education service at an historic religious site. As a consultant since
1997 he has worked with numerous museums and historic properties and also acts as a judge for the
Heritage Education Trust’s Sandford Award for Heritage Education. He has been closely involved
with the work of the Group for Education in Museums for many years, running training events and
networks.
Title:Creative Minds
By: Helen Barraclough and Becky Bracy
Establishing a network of learning provision for Science, Technology, Engineering and Maths (STEM)
activities using the resources and expertise of Yorkshire’s museums, libraries and archives.
This project, which is funded by Yorkshire Forward, is developing innovative, context based programs
which are introducing and explaining the STEM subjects through practical, interactive workshops and
other events. The main thrust of the project is to encourage enquiry into these subjects, promoting the
use of questions and curiosity. Although targeted at 5-18 year olds, Creative Minds also encourages
family and lifelong learning.
The main strands which have been developed to date are:









Establishing a Creative Minds network throughout the region
Training museum, libraries and archive professionals in the opportunities for including STEM
activities in their practice
Museum ambassadors linked with SETPOINT
Teacher placements in museums, developing STEM based educational resources.
Teacher training in the Creative Science approach
Out of school science clubs
Educational resources
Travelling Exhibition
Permanent gallery on the communication of the science of sound at Eureka!, the museum for
children.
Title: Ignite! identifying and supporting exceptionally creative young people
By: Rick Hall
NESTA (National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts)
The Ignite! project is founded on the belief that individual exceptional creativity is a vital and volatile
part of the complexities of childhood and growth. It used to be said that the majority of children
entering primary education will enter the world of employment in jobs that haven’t been invented yet;
now the pace of change in the creative economy is such that that statement is now more applicable to
young people entering secondary phase education.
34
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
We are now in the pilot phase (Year 1) of Ignite! targeting two age groups of young people: 10-15
and 16-21 year olds. We are developing the project initially in the Black Country region of the West
Midlands and in Northern Ireland.
Sequences of activities, comprising ‘Creativity Workshops’ and ‘Creativity Labs’ have been designed
with the assistance of NESTA Fellow, Dr Kevin Byron, to stimulate the creative thinking (in its
broadest definition) of the young participants, and to assist in the diagnostic process of identifying
their enthusiasms and mapping their creative pathways.
This paper will describe the planning, delivery and outcomes of the pilot phase of Ignite! and will
explore the underlying concepts of teaching, learning, discovering or generating creative thinking in
young people on which the project is based.
Title: “Our Town”: Inner-city children as Visual and Spatial Learners
By: Claire Gallagher School of Education Georgian Court University New Jersey
“Our Town” was a project for inner-city, at-risk children in the city of Pittsburgh, in which twenty eight
and nine year old children were asked to design a fictitious city, and ultimately to design and build an
intervention for their neighborhood. The resultant intervention, a park, was in contrast to the more
typical adult response, a playground. Issues of intergenerational interaction, safety, comfort, and
visual delight were among the key elements identified by the children as essential in their design.
The children’s product and process revealed a clear understanding of the distinction between
neighborhood and community and suggested connections between the effects of autonomy in the
built environment and spatial understanding. A subsequent study comparing this work with that of a
second group of suburban children further strengthened this correlation. This paper will discuss the
history of the “Our Town” project and what the children’s designs reveal to us as educators. Special
attention will be paid to the rationale of the use of visual and spatial thinking as vehicles for instruction
with inner-city children.
Title: Innovations in teamwork; experiences in teaching physics in grades 5 and 6
By: Sivbritt Dumbrajs Department of Applied Education Joensuu University Finland
(with S Bergström-Nyberg, B Federley, A Glader, K Helle and M Rosenblad)
Our society demands us to develop innovative skills to a degree never heard of before. This has not
been sufficiently taken into account in the national curriculum of the state school in Finland. According
to the new curriculum children in grades five and six of primary school should start learning physics
and chemistry no later than 2006. Their class teachers, many of whom have a poor knowledge of
these subjects, feel that they are not capable of answering this challenge. A team of subject teachers
and class teachers have tried to meet these challenges by developing a teaching and learning
process for primary school children and their teachers. The process is based on children’s
experiential knowledge and problem based learning. The children collaborate in small groups learning
from each other. Teachers have the task to facilitate the learning process. Material for students and
teachers is published on the web. Topics to be handled are suggested and a teacher’s guide is
available for each topic. A discussion forum is about to be opened. First experiences of teaching and
learning in this context are already available.
Title: Using ‘ICT-supported’ action research as an approach to teacher professional
development
By: Steve Higgins and Kate Wall Centre for Learning and Teaching University of Newcastle
UK
35
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
This paper will report on the methodology of two research projects investigated by the Centre for
Learning and Teaching at Newcastle University in partnership with teachers across the country.
These projects have aimed to support school-based research under the themes of Digital Portfolios
and Learning to Learn. Both these projects have aimed to shift the balance of power away from
academia and into the classroom, thus into the teachers’ domain; this shifts the locus of control in
professional development whilst maintaining a focus for the research activity. The teachers have
been encouraged to instigate changes, within the project brief, that they feel are appropriate and then
the University team have supported them with research evidence about what is likely to be influential
and the research processes in terms of collecting data, analysing results and writing up the projects.
Support materials are published by way of a password protected website to which teachers have
access and on-line assistance. This strategy is emerging as empowering for the teachers themselves,
but also as common research tools are introduced to the different case studies, then conclusions can
also be drawn across the whole sample. We will argue that this is a powerful and effective means to
professional development.
Title: The Do It Yourself School: E. F. O’Neill of Prestolee
By: Cathy Burke School of Education University of Leeds
In 1919, Edward F O’Neill became Head teacher of Prestolee County Elementary School near Bolton
in Lancashire. This was a regular state school taking children between the ages of 5 and 14 from a
community, the majority of whom were mill and factory workers. O’Neill himself was a Salford lad who
had received little more than an elementary education. Between 1919 and the early 1950s, O’Neill
conducted an extraordinary experiment in education. ‘Learning by Doing’ was the guiding principle
which transformed the built environment and landscape of the school and in so doing challenged all
of the preconceptions about school organization and pedagogy. In 1952, when O’Neill’s story was
told in a book entitled ‘The Idiot Teacher’, the author, Gerard A. Holmes noted, ‘it seems that the time
is not inappropriate for telling the story of one man who, during the past thirty years, has patiently
and courageously brought into being a school in which children are able to develop their innate
characteristics – trustfulness, truthfulness, helpfulness, discovery, activity, initiative, concentration,
gregariousness – and grow into well informed, conscientious, resourceful companions’. This paper
will argue that the time is once again appropriate to tell the story of this extraordinary school within
the contemporary context of building classrooms and schools of the future.
The paper will draw from an archive of visual and textual material including film, photographs, letters,
personal testimony and published articles. It will seek to demonstrate how only a teacher’s
appreciation of the significance of the built environment and the material culture of schooling coupled
with an understanding of the child as an innovator, constructor and researcher of their own world can
bring about pedagogical transformation within schools.
Title: Innovative Classrooms for All Children
By: Kathy Irwin Consultant and Trainer Chicago
Welcome to a multi-media examination of 1968 research into the ingenious classroom of Newcastle
Upon Tyne educator, Shirley Pybus. Tune in to the varied, ever-evolving tradition of creating
stimulating learning environments. Watch video footage of 3 & 4-year-old children at work and play in
a lively, non-traditional setting. View the riotous color slides of their marvelous paintings and ponder
their artistic vitality, undiminished by the realities of an impoverished neighborhood.
Care, imagination and professional skill were the daily investment in this space where growth was
expected, stimulated and encouraged. Consider how we might also cultivate a foundation of
compassion and informed confidence in the ability of all children to flourish, in spite of the obstacles
they must face. Examine what a richly provisioned environment contributes, particularly when the
basic needs of daily life are poorly met. Know that it is possible to witness incredible speeds of
transformation even when families are distracted or distressed by the pressures of time and
employment. Believe that parents can and do change in harmony with the changes in their children.
36
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Title: Virtual classrooms and the persistence of recitation
By: Rob Walker Centre for Applied Research in Education
University of East Anglia
We know that interactions in schools are framed in many different ways by physical spaces.
Classrooms in particular have developed customary forms of interaction between teachers and
students (and among students) that have developed within conventional classroom spaces. So
ingrained have these forms of interaction become that the appear to persist even when the classroom
itself disappears. We noticed thirty years or more ago that when school systems developed open-plan
classroom designs, that teachers would often recreate 'closed' classrooms within them by moving the
furniture or by creating invisible barriers. Now we see the same things happening in e-learning. Freed
of the physical constraints of the classroom, what we tend to do is revert to the most conventional
pedagogic forms of interaction. I this paper I will talk briefly about the history of the classroom, look at
open plan designs and then
discuss, speculatively the directions that e-learning seems to be taking.
Title: Revealing Children's Capabilities through ICT for those with SEN
By: Helen May School of Education University of Leeds
This paper reports on the findings of a doctoral study that considered pupils’ engagement in curricular
tasks. The research was a collective case study of seven children with learning difficulties, conducted
in two mainstream primary schools and four classroom contexts within the UK.
The paper will draw in particular on an ICT lesson with two distinct phases, one that was directed by
the teacher and the other managed by the child. It will examine the apparent differences between the
two phases, whereupon giving the child responsibility for the task enabled them to more easily
demonstrate their ICT skills and capabilities. The paper will compare the two phases as a reflection
of the child's abilities. It will examine differences in the child's support needs and requirements
across the two phases as well as differences in the strategies the child utilised to complete the
assigned task.
The paper will raise some important issues for educators, practitioners and academics alike. The
findings show that teacher-imposed structures had implications for the child's ability to act
autonomously. The findings also provide justification for questioning whether systems put in place to
support children in their learning provide the opportunity to determine children's capabilities as
learners.
Personal profile
I have recently completed a postdoctoral research fellowship in Education at the University of Leeds,
funded by the Economic and Social Research Council. My research interests include pupil
participation, learner autonomy, active learning, self-regulated learning, children's rights, inclusion,
teacher expectations and issues of discrimination. Much of the research I have conducted thus far
addresses issues for children with special needs, who have traditionally been subject to exclusion
within education and stereotypical depictions through labelling. My educational and research
interests stem from working as a primary school teacher in mainstream schools. I was concerned
that the system put in place to help children who have difficulties in learning focused on what they
were not achieving rather than on their potential to achieve. My doctoral study addressed aspects of
pupil participation that had not been fully investigated through empirical studies. Rather than focus
on their participation as determined and encouraged by the teacher, the research considered the
pupils’ standpoint through their engagement in curricular tasks.
Title: The need for flexible heads
By: Birgir Edwald Headmaster Sunnulaekjarskoli Selfoss
37
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
The importance of innovation
- Headmasters view My former school, Barnaskólinn á Eyrarbakka og Stokkseyri has been taking part in the InnoEd
project from the begining. Most of the project time I was the deputy headmaster of that school but last
February I took a job as a headmaster in a different school. So therefore this is partly a deputy
headmasters view and partly a headmasters view. My role in the project has been more of
integrating the project into the schools development rather than doing the actual teaching myself.
Although I taught innovation education two lessons a week for a few months last year.
[Developing BES]
Of elementary schools in Iceland still practicing today, Barnaskólinn á Eyrarabakka og Stokkseyri, is
the oldest. It was established in 1852 and is therefore 152 years old this autumn. Most of this period
there have been two separate schools with two headmasters, in the two small villages of Eyrarbakki
and Stokkseyri on the south coast of Iceland. I started teaching at Eyrarbakki in 1983 and taught
there until 1995 when I took two years off. I used those years to finish an education in computer
programming, which I had started earlier, and then I went to work as a computer programmer. I soon
found out that working with computers is far from being as rewarding as working with students so I
returned to the school as a deputy headmaster in the autumn of ‘97. At this time there had been a
very drastic changes in the school. The two schools had been reunited after a century of separation
and there was a new headmaster.
[30 years of stability]
For the past almost 30 years the same headmasters had been serving in both schools and therefore I
refer to this period as a period of stability, which is far more positive than stagnation. ]
[introducing ICT]
When given the task of reuniting two schools of this kind, we thought it was very important to look
ahead for new tasks and victories rather than looking back to our long history and traditions, even
though traditions are valuable to any school. Therefore we focused on a few school developing
tasks. One of them was the humble aim of becoming a leading school in the use of ICT in Iceland. To
make a long story short we applied to the ministry to become one of three schools in Iceland declared
to be a pioneer schools in the use of ICT.
[VIA teachers]
In that project we made up our minds about several things.
• One of them was that it is highly important that teachers feel that they are
contributing to the development, not only doing as they are told.
• We decided that ICT was not to become a separate subject on top of every other
subject in the schools curriculum but would be integrated in every subject. The aim
would be to take up a new way of doing things rather than start doing new things.
We would aim at using ICT as a tool in learning and teaching in every subject. Of
course students would have to get the skills of using computers but that was not the
main aim of bringing computers into the school.
• We decided that we would work against a common myth in Iceland at that time, that
youngsters are so good with computers that it is no problem if teachers are not sure
how to do things, they could simply ask the students for help
• Therefore we decided that our first steps in introducing ICT to our school would be
aimed at the teachers, not the pupils. The first year we spent all our money for
computer equipment to buy computers for teachers and nothing to buy computers for
students. We also gave a lot of in service training courses about the use of
computers.
[School development
 Innovation IN Education
 Innovation Education]
A few years later when Rosa and Gísli offered us to take part in the InnoEd project we thought that
we had some experience of Innovation IN education, but were not sure if we knew enough about
innovation education. That was not what we had been focusing on.
38
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
So the question was, could we draw upon our experience of Innovation IN Education to tackle this
new task of introducing innovation education to our school.
[Innovation: teachers AND pupils]
One of our strong believe was that school development had to go through the teachers. This had
been successful in the introduction of ICT and would also be important in the introduction of
innovation education.
We are also strong believers in the importance of the teachers ownership of Innovation IN education.
It is very important that teachers do not perceive them selves to be the recipients of new ideas and
methods but as the creators of new ideas and methods. This does harmony rather well with the idea
of innovation education. We believe that it is more important to grow new plants rather than plant
fully grown ones. This is a key element in motivation. When moving from a Innovation IN Education to
an Innovation education we are taking the idea of ownership of new ideas on step further: Changes
are not only created by the teachers but by the students them selves. We saw this as an opportunity
to motivate our students the same way as we had motivated our teachers in the ICT project.
[Innovative Teachers]
[Teachers have always been innovative and will always be innovative]
It is impossible to be a teacher without being innovative. Just to cope with the normal school day you
need to be innovative. There are lot of stories and films about innovative teachers. Teachers who
have managed to reach to their students in a very innovative and sometimes unique way to make
them better students and better persons in one way or another.
But the reason for being innovative in teaching can be of different kinds
–
[innovative out of need
• demanding pupils
• problems of discipline and behaviour]
Some teachers are being innovative out of need, that is their way of doing things does not work
anymore. They are having problems to keep on doing things as they have always done. Many of
them wish that they could do things the same way as they have always done – but that just doesn’t
work any more. They have problems. The solution to their problems is to be innovative
–
[innovative out of foresight
• changes in society
• speed of changes in society]
Other teachers are innovative out of foresight. They realize that the changes in society are getting
more and more rapid every year. This a very important aspect
In the last century the changes in the way people would go about their jobs were more or less in the
same phase as the coming of new generations. New skills and new technology were brought in by
new generations. This is not the case any longer.
I some times take me and my father as an example of these changes. He is now retired but during his
working life he was a pharmacist. He finished his education in 1951 end then he worked as a
pharmacist his whole working life without going back to school. He got new recipes- of course, but
the features of his work remained the same throughout his working life. I finished my teachers
education in ’83 and thought I could do the same. That was a misunderstanding – I’ve been back to
school twice since then not counting a heap of in service training courses. My daughters on the other
hand are in university now, they expect to keep on working on their education more or less in the
coming years. They do not expect anything else.
This is a very drastic change that has happened in a decade or two.
But what does this have to do with innovation education?
Everything – I think .
I will come back to that later.
39
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
[Innovative students]
As I said about teachers earlier, it is also impossible to be a student without being innovative. There
are also a lot of stories about innovative students. The only problem is that students innovativeness
is not always going in the directions that the teacher wants and expects. But why is that a problem?
A part of the answer is that we are not sure how we should perceive students
•
[How do we perceive students?
– Students as a material (natural resource)]
We could look at our students as a material (natural resource). Then our opinion would be that the
future society needs a certain kind of people, innovative, considerate, caring, responsible and
respectful. We should produce that kind of citizens in our schools.
– [Student as a consumer]
We could look at the student as a consumer. Then the school is an establishment offering a certain
kind of service. The students should be allowed to have a saying in how teacher go about their work.
After all it is their future we are preparing them for.
– [Student as an inventor]
Perhaps we should see our students as inventors. Learning is understanding ideas and the
understanding itself, is an invention in the students own mind. Therefore every student or a learner is
an inventor by definition.
– [Students as a creator]
Perhaps we should see our students as creators. Learning is not only about understanding but also
creating, learning by doing is a very important way of learning.
[How do parents perceive the role of schools?]
I’m not going to answer this question, this is just a remainder for us teachers that we must remember
that there are many stakeholders in the educational system. This is a highly political matter and
most likely addressed in the national curriculum in each country. And of course we must take notice
of what the policy makers have decided.
[Innovation is free spirited]
•
[Can we control something that must be free?]
Earlier I referred to students innovativeness as something that has always been, but not necessarily
what teachers have welcomed at all times. If we intend to integrate innovation into our teaching as a
teaching method in every subject we must realize that we are giving up a part of our controlling
power. Maybe this is necessary and should be welcomed by all teachers. If innovation is a
necessary ingredient in society we must learn to handle it. Responsibility and freedom are two sides
of the same coin. You can’t have responsibility without the freedom to be irresponsible. (Then it is just
obedience)
•
[Teaching is no longer a training]
We must realize that we are preparing students for a society that is changing so rapidly that we can
not foresee how it will be in their adulthood. We must teach our students to mange in new and
unknown circumstances, using new and unknown tools to solve new and unknown tasks. For that
reason we can no longer train them for the future. We train for a certain task we know how to do and
we do not know how the future will be. History shows that we are not even good at guessing it.
•
[Teaching is preparing for a new and unknown assignments.]
This is why I said earlier that the rapid changes in society make innovation education so necessary.
Our task is to prepare our students for a future where their own innovativeness and initiative are the
most important aspects.
40
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
•
Pupils are going on a mission to the future, a mission to build a good peaceful society.
Teaching is the preparation for that.
[Innovative school development]
Then about restrictions:
•
[Do rules and regulations allow pupils to be innovative?
– national exams
– requirements to be met]
•
[Do rules and regulations allow teachers to be innovative?
– national curriculum]
•
[Do rules and regulations allow headmasters to be innovative?
– national curriculum
– school evaluation]
It is important that we keep in mind that although becoming innovative in learning and teaching does
require a certain amount of freedom it does not mean that we are lowering our standards. Being
innovative is about finding new solutions and therefore we must find solutions that can allow us to
integrate innovation education in our schools without lowering standards or not meeting the
requirements we need to meet.
Do we need innovation?
YES, I think we really need to focus on how we treat the concept of innovation in the schools of
today’s modern society. All around us we can see how inventions have put their mark on society, not
only in our western civilisation but also in other parts of the world. And I’m not only thinking of
inventions as tools and equipment but also as all kinds of services and business opportunities.
There are lots of fundamental questions that need to be asked, ethic questions about the
responsibility of inventors, questions about how we treat the environment, questions about right and
wrong. Those questions are coming up more and more often.
I believe that innovation is as big part of human existence as language and communication skills. It is
often said that making of tools is what separates us from other animals. But making of tools, and
even business opportunities is of course innovation in a nutshell.
It is really astonishing how little attention innovation has got in schools and education until now.
•
Innovative society needs:
– innovative schools
– run by innovative headmaster
– who need innovative teachers
– for innovative students
•
Innovative students need:
– innovative teachers
– who need innovative headmasters
– to run innovative schools
– for an innovative society
Title: Creating new cultures of learning in schools: lessons from the Children’s Fund
By: Barry Percy-Smith The SOLAR Action Research Centre University of the West of England
41
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
The recent surge in Children’s initiatives and legislation (such as Sure Start and Children’s Fund,
Creative Partnerships, The Green Paper Every Child Matters, The Children Bill that followed,
Excellence in Schools etc) have challenged schools to think differently about how they operate. Local
evaluation of a local Children’s Fund Partnership has generated insights into the extent to which
schools are central to improving the lifechances of children, both in terms of partnerships with other
agencies within a wider multi-agency context of integrated services, but also in terms of their own
culture and ethos in providing school services. Through the use of a ‘whole system’ action inquiry
process, the evaluation gained systemic insights into dilemmas of school services and therefore
areas where innovation in education needs to happen.
This paper will use Children’s Fund evaluation data as well as insights from Creative Partnerships to
highlight the need for innovation and fundamental cultural change in schools. The paper will discuss
problems with the current culture and ethos of schools around issues such as: teacher attitudes and
relationships with children; the need for a ‘wider’ curriculum to include greater emphasis on children’s
personal, social and emotional development and creative expression; issues of governance and
democracy in schools including the participation and inclusion of children. The paper will then link
school cultural change with school leadership and raise questions about, for example, why many
Heads are resistant to change. It concludes by arguing for the development of schools as learning
organizations in order to facilitate change, as a fundamental element of innovation in education.
Title: Nurturing talent or just exercising it?
By: K C Byron Visiting Lecturer at Glasgow University and Visiting Senior Fellow at Hull
University (with the LTSN); work on creativity
funded by NESTA
Creativity is characterised by an ability to see problems in new ways and to find solutions that are not
bounded by current thought or practice. Creativity can appear in virtually any form and flourishes in
environments where equal emphasis is given to the nurture of talent and the acquisition of
knowledge. Equally, it vanishes when either of these is traded-off against the other. The teaching
style, content and environment for these developments are quite different.
Talent is fed through seeking solutions to open-ended problems in an environment where making
mistakes is recognised as a positive sign of creative experimentation. Whilst creativity is ‘caught
rather than taught’ there are a number of tools and techniques that can be taught to enable an
individual to find imaginative solutions to problems and hence taste the experience of the creative
process.
This paper will describe experiences and observations in the delivery of creativity workshops to
primary and secondary school children. In these workshops the emphasis is on invention and
innovation and tools described include conceptual-combination, visualisation and shifting perspective.
In addition recent work has focussed on the challenges for providing the right conditions both in the
environment and the individual for creative work.
Keynote Paper:
Title: Creative Collaborations in the Design of Technologies for Learning: A Futurelab
Perspective
By: Keri Facer Director of Learning Research NESTA Futurelab
Bibliography:
42
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Keri has been working with Futurelab since its inception in 2001 as Learning Research Director. Prior
to this she was lecturer in Education and New Technologies at Bristol University, and was involved in
a number of major research projects exploring young people’s use of digital technologies at home
and at school, including the ESRC ScreenPlay and InterActive Projects and the DFES funded
Evaluation of the National Grid for Learning. Keri has published widely in the field of children’s
popular cultures, technology and learning and has recently co-authored the book ‘ScreenPlay:
Children and Computing in the Home’.
NESTA Futurelab was set up in 2001 by NESTA and the DFES in order to bring together the
education, creative arts and technology communities to create innovative digital resources for
education using next generation technologies. This presentation will describe the ways of working
that Futurelab has been developing over the last two years to involve children, teachers, artists and
technology developers in the design process. It will introduce some of the projects currently being
developed by Futurelab, including: the Virtual Savannah, a collaboration between the BBC,
Futurelab, Mobile Bristol and the Mixed Reality Lab at Nottingham University that enables children to
‘act as lions’ in a virtual savannah on their school playing field; Virtual Puppeteers, a collaboration
with digital artists squid soup, to create an online virtual puppet theatre; Welcome to the
Neighbourhood, a dynamic solar system sculpture for public spaces; and Moovl, an animated physics
drawing tool for young children using tablet PCs.
The presentation will explore the challenges and opportunities to be gained from bringing together
diverse communities in the design of learning resources; the different approaches to working with
children in these processes; and the implications of these practices for future developments in ICT
and education more generally.
Parallel Papers:
Title: Measuring Organisation Readiness for Innovation: The Learning Organisation
Framework Instituting Total Innovation
By: Ghazi Alkhatib Qatar College of Technology
This paper establishes a framework for measuring organization readiness for innovation based on
learning organization principles. The framework is based on the premise that an innovative
organization must be a learning organization. The framework may be applied to all types of
organizations: education, business, and government. The framework is established along two major
components: structure and processes. The structure provides the foundation for organization
learning and consists of the following parts:
LO principles: system thinking/personal mastery (training), mental models (creativity and innovation),
shared vision (strategic planning).
Levels of organization learning constructs (individual, teams, organization). Within teams, three
levels of teams are identifies: quality teams, knowledge teams, and innovation teams. Another
aspect of OL is the learning process types: single loop, double loop, and triple loop learning. These
are tied to the three levels of teams as listed above, respectively.
The processes provide a mechanism for achieving a learning organization and consist of two parts:
Role of IT, where four levels of IT role in organization are used: factory, support, turnaround, and
strategic. Role of IT for teams, we used collaborate software and knowledge management systems.
Communication, with the following two major factors: IT-business alignment (fac1), communication
directions (vertical, diagonal, horizontal) (fac2)
The following table represents relationships among the components. The two dimensions represent
the structure and the body of the table represents processes:
Levels of
Learning
Organization
Teams
Quality
Knowledge
Learning organization principles
Shared Vision
System Thinking
IT Communicatio IT Communication
n
Fac1
Fac2
Fac1
Fac2
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
43
Personal Mastery
IT
Communication
Mental Models
IT
Communication
4
Fac1
4
Fac2
4
4
Fac1
4
Fac2
4
Total
48
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
48
48
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Innovation
Individual
Total score
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
4
2
20
20
20 20
20
20
20
20
20
20
20
0
IT organization: Factory 1, support 2, turnaround 3, strategic 4
Communication: low 1, medium 2, high 3,
IT teams: low 1, medium 2, high 3, very high 4
very high 4
Scores on rows provide a measure of the readiness of the three levels of learning. Total scores of
the columns provide a measure for each of the learning organization principles. A survey with a
check list questions will be provided to guide scoring for each level and learning organization
principles. Maximum scores are provided in the table as a guideline.
Title: Instituting Total Innovation
By: Omar Al-Humaidi General Organization for Technical Education and Vocational Training
Riyadh Saudi Arabia
The main objective of this paper is to discover the thinking potential of the students and utilize it
accordingly. The second objective is to apply the Natural Learning (Acquisition). The third and last
objective is to communicate effectively through considering individuals’ different backgrounds.
In general, the traditional approach of education was dominant in the last century. It was a one-way
communication dealing with the left hemisphere teaching a rigid curriculum. However that is not
applicable for this millennium, as a result of global changes. Therefore we should really institute a
total innovative approach to exploit the maximum power of thinking. This study will introduce a
comprehensive model for the innovative schools called ITI-Ed, which stands for Instituting Total
Innovation in Education. ITI-Ed supports the Natural Learning Approach by applying the Whole Brain
Learning concept to utilize left and right hemisphere thinking modes.
ITI-Ed starts by conducting a Thinking Mapping Survey to the Administrators and Teachers using
HBDI (Herrmann Brain Dominance Instrument). In Addition, students will take a Special HBDI Survey.
Then, Administrators and Teachers will participate in a ‘thinking training workshop’ for three days.
The main objective of the training workshop is to achieve a self understanding of the thinking
preferences and how to communicate/ teach others considering their thinking profiles which will
impact on achieving the Accelerated Learning concept.
In the final stage, three systems would be established in the school. These systems are HR Thinking
System, Innovation System and Excellency Bank.
Finally, this proposed approach was tested in an industrial organization. In this study, I am trying to
apply it to high school students.
Title: About the relation between Innovation Education and Technology Education - an
example concerning Technology Oriented Teacher Education
By: Matti Lindh Lecturer in Technology Education University of Oulu
Foreword
44
48
48
240
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Innovation Education has been one of the essential aims in Technology Oriented Teacher Education
during two years. We believe that it is most effective to learn technology by making technology.
Because technology is result of innovative activities Innovation Education is fitting to our curriculum in
Technology Education. We also believe that dissemination of innovative thinking is most effective
when it will be started in teacher training. Then, the becoming teachers can start Innovation
Education with their pupils on primary level in Technology Education. For that reason we have
integrated Technology Education and Innovation Education in teacher training.
The aim of this report is to discover our background and theory according what we have been created
innovative activities. Also some experiments have been done concerning innovative abilities of
Technology Oriented Teacher Education.
Typically Innovation Education is not limited in some special school subject but it has power to
connect certain contents. Even though Innovation Education has a ‘multi subject’ nature some school
subject seem to suit specially for its’ activities. Because contents of science studies and hands on
activities are providing possibilities to produce some concrete products Innovation Education is
mostly concentrated to this area. At school level this means that Finnish main subjects will be
Technical Work and Physics.
To combine Technical Work and Physics in innovative Technology Education is a challenging
attempt. To se this combination as an innovative subject matter demands theory which should be
flexible enough concerning Technology Education. A supposition should be set; Technology
Education have to be area of knowledge and skills at the same time. This hypothesis makes it
possible to se connections between the concepts remarkable in defining Technology Education on
operational level. It also makes possible to understand Technology Education a constant process,
which has innovative influence to society surrounding us.
1. Background of Technology Education in University of Oulu
In this connection Technology Education means an area of knowledge and skills in which it is
possible to deepen one's understanding of technology in such a way that the learner can cope with
technology and with problems related to its learning, can apply technological knowledge and skills
and is able to provide vocational and scientific education applying technology (Lindh 1997).
Both in Oulu Teacher Training School and in Technology Concentrated Teacher Education has been
systematic developing processes of Technology Education. Nominally we can say, that Technology
Education means education for a world based on technology. In Oulu Teacher Training School
Technology Education is realized in co-operation with Technical Work and Natural Sciences. This
way it is practical-theoretical education by nature and it has connections to mathematical-scientific as
well. The central problems in Technology Education are to learn to understand technological
knowledge, theory and the effects of natural laws on the one hand, and to combine practice with
creative making and understanding of technical application on the other hand. This is also called
technological literacy (Jenkins 1997). Technology Oriented Teacher Education in Oulu University is
created according the same vision. Generally we can say, that Technology Education in Oulu
University means the combination of Science Based Technology Education and Design Based
Technology Education (UNESCO 1983).
There are some practical reasons to create theory, which is connecting Design Based Technology
Education and Science Based Technology Education in University of Oulu. Oulu region is nowadays
totally depended on industry concerning high-technology. For that reason it is natural that Technology
Education is one of the major areas in developing on Faculty of Education. Actually the whole
university including rector Lauri Lajunen and administration of faculty are supporting our attempt to
develop Technology Education fitting to our circumstances.
In Finnish scale history we really have: already in 1970th Viki Matihaldi (lecturer in Technical Work)
was started to move traditional Handy Craft to Technology Education. In 1990 we started to train
class teachers to Technical Work teachers according the idea of Technology Education. Since 1996
we have got the Technology Oriented Teacher Education, which means 20 new students every year
concentrating to the theories and teacher practices concerning Technology Education.
45
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Because of the beneficial circumstances we have been able to created projects to contribute
Technology Education on the level of practical schoolwork in Oulu district. In co-operation Jarmo
Mustikka (lecturer in Technical Work) and Matti Hasari (lecturer in Science and Computer Studies)
have started on Upper Secondary Level in Oulu Teacher Training School a Technology Education
project specialised in electronics and how to teach it by using computer based learning environments.
The main problem in this project is how to connect the theoretical knowledge of Science and practical
skills of Technical Work innovative way as a suitable learning environment on the level of upper
secondary school. On essential finding seems to be the meaning of computer based learning
environment for students participating to project. Because students are skilled to use computer as a
tool in problem solving they easily first find solutions applying suitable routines in that kind of
environment. At these circumstances they can add the theoretical concepts of science to the practical
skills needed for building electronic equipments. Because of the deeper understanding of technology
it is necessary to realise that technological entity. It provides the concrete artefact for considering it's
applications in technological world surrounding us. According this idea this project is extending to the
area of robotics.
Now, when we have started separate projects concerning Technology Education, we may need to
utilize the experiences for Innovation Education. These experiences already are to be seen in both
Technology Oriented Teacher Education and Technical Work education.
1.1. Essential Principles of the Technology Oriented Teacher Education
Programme
According the definition of Technology Education the main idea of the Technology Oriented Teacher
Education Programme is that every citizen should have knowledge and skills of technology such that
he/she can cope with a society based on technology and with its development. In the Technology
Oriented Primary Teacher Education Programme, Technology Education is implemented in all the
studies in the school subjects through integrative themes and contents typical of the subjects. It also
means an innovative learning environment in which it is possible to apply the opportunities offered by
information technology and technological substance to the various school subjects.
When the curriculum for the Technology Oriented Teacher Education Programme was created, some
essential principles directed the work. Aware of the huge mass of technological substance, we
concentrated on the knowledge and skills available in our university. Each of them can be considered
as situational empiry on the curriculum level. As a result on the theoretical level, we can provide some
essential principles for the Technology Oriented Teacher Education Programme:
* New contents and approaches for innovative studies.
* Need to develop connections between Science and Technology Education.
* Need to develop entrepreneurial education in teacher education.
* Need to develop Educational Technology in Technology Education
* To be familiar with modern trends in teacher education and to develop international co-operation in
that connection.
These principles will lead to competences in which:
* The teacher is able to utilise the possibilities offered by technology in his/her work in innovative way.
* The teacher is capable of teaching the pupils to understand the world based on technology, its
drawbacks and advantages and how to develop it on the individual level and on the level of society.
* The teacher is capable of utilising his science knowledge and skills to develop technology education
and utilising his knowledge and skills of technology to develop science education.
The aim of the Technology Oriented Teacher Education Programme is not to turn the teachers into
”technocrats”, but into experts in the field of technology. (See Hacker & Barden 1988.)
On the practical level, the Technology Oriented Teacher Programme is based on a concern about
children and young people living in a world dependent on technology; how do they cope with it and
how do they grow as innovative citizens who are able to influence its development. We know that the
technological world consists of concrete objects, knowledge and skills behind them. We also know
that technology in itself has a logic that has its roots in science and practical production. So the main
problem in technology education is how to teach this reality to children and young people. To be
46
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
innovative demands also some facilities. According our experiences school subject Technical Work is
one of the most effective.
1.2. Some features of Technical Work education at the University of Oulu
Technical Work is playing remarkable role in developing Technology Education. For that reason it is
essential part of Technology Oriented Teacher Education and through that in close connection with
Innovation Education. The University of Oulu offers teacher education in Technical Work for class
teachers of comprehensive school.
The students can choose from among two kinds of courses:
hour
90
300
1. Basic course in Technical Work
2. Specialisation course in Technical Work
credit
4,5
15
The two courses above are for class teachers. The students in the class teacher education can
proceed step by step to the specialisation course in Technical Work.
1.1.2. The aims of Technical Work at the lower comprehensive level
By integrating science in certain activities Technical Work is providing very good circumstances for
innovative activities. Therefore the aims of teacher education have been set up according Technology
Education as an innovative theme.
In basic course the class teachers must be able to:
* Give knowledge and skills prerequisite for lower comprehensive level in
technical work, e.g. they must be able to control the materials and
techniques applied with children in innovative way.
* Teach how to plan simply things by innovative sketching.
* Plan their teaching in Technical Work.
In specialisation course the class teacher must be able to:
* Create the curriculum of his/hers own for technical work and integrate it
to the other school subjects through innovative activities.
* Understand the processes and development in technological world at the
level of lower comprehensive school.
* Solve the technical problems in everyday life using innovative method.
* Deepen the skills and knowledge through the projects in Technical Work.
* Be able to use the products and equipment of the technological
development in lower comprehensive level.
* Follow the technological development and apply its results to his/hers teacher practice by
creating new ideas for the Technical Work education.
* Combine educational sciences to the studies in Technical Work to solve problems in innovative
Technology Education.
* Create the positive attitudes of the pupils to the practical work.
As we se the aims of Technical Work and Technology Oriented Teacher Education are fitting together
providing a good environment for innovative action.
1.1.3. How to concrete the aims?
Both Technology Oriented Teacher Education and Technical Work have the same elements
concerning innovative action. Black and Harrison (1986, s. 133 – 134) mentioned that in task-actioncapability has three dimensions: 1) Resources, 2) Capability and 3) Awareness. Resources means
resources of knowledge, skill and experience which can be drawn upon, consciously or
subconsciously, when involved in active task. Capability means capability to perform, to originate, to
get things done, to make and stand by decisions. Awareness means also perception and
understanding needed for making balanced and effective value judgements.
47
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
In this case Technology Oriented Teacher Education and Technical Work are providing the resources
to develop both knowledge and skills. Innovative mind could be suitable to provide capability to
combine and unit both knowledge and skills. Innovation Education should be the element bringing up
the awareness of consequences of innovative action. Then, there are some other elements
necessary to notice to concrete the aims of innovative process.
Even though an innovative process has intuitive features learner must have some knowledge about
technical world surrounding us. The combination of innovation and technology education is providing
a suitable environment for Technical Work as a school subject encouraging to creative action.
According the ordinary believe you must at least be creative if you are able to make innovations.
Wisdom in certain meaning has been added to capability to make innovations as well. This could be
true but is it possible to grove up to innovative personality? Are there some peripherical functions we
are able to manipulate so that we would be innovative?
If we think innovation as a whole there have to be some incentive for creative work. That could be
some need rising up from the mind. This can be happened by change when we meet some everyday
problem. Anyway, we have to be prepared to react in innovative mind. This means we have to have
some capabilities to do the innovation. In other word, we have to be responsible concerning the
taught we share for innovations. In this meaning, Innovative activity is to be defined as a process
concerning both planning and producing the concrete product.
The capability to plan a product is highly depending on experiences of innovator. A small child use to
tell what he or she is doing. A bigger one can do some drawings what are more or less equal with the
final product. In that case it is more important to learn to think pencil in hand than produce ready
made drawings. Then, the aid of teacher is crucial. Teacher can give those essential advices needed
for meaningful work. We have to remember it is quite hard to teach elder people to plan by drawing if
we don’t start the training with those young children. For that reason there is no right or wrong picture
about object child is doing. Teacher’s duty is to foster the child add some details to his/hers drawing
picturing the pattern of his/hers innovation.
The innovative process can be described as if we were scrolling the idea in the mind and on the
paper as well. This seems to be hard to learn for young children. They likely say: “My plan is ready”
when they have some separate lines on paper. They really see those lines as an object they want to
produce. If teacher say: “Please, add some details to your drawing” they can be frustrated and stop
planning. For that reason it is necessary to make a contract with children they will do for example
three details about his/hers innovation. First those details are not so restricted. They can be some not
so remarkable features as well. Little by little the children learn to understand the meaning of details
and their relations to final product. But this also need some drill in planning.
The most serious problem in “thinking with the pencil” is negative attitudes towards drawing.
Necessarily, those attitudes are not rising against the drawing it self. Child can feel he/she cannot
draw in proper way. Another problem is concerning the ability to combine scientific knowledge and
practical skill for problem solving.
Because of amount of variables in creative action some theory should be available to organise the
innovative action. To simplify the relation between Technology Education and Technical Work we se
Technology Education as a superordinate concept to Technical Work. Then there is possible to
create a theory fitting to the situation Innovation Education could be understood as creative learning
process.
2. About the theory behind the innovative action in Technology Education
When Black and Harrison (1986) se that task-action-capability is the individual potential in action with
technology there could be some general model uniting resources, capability and awareness. If we se
that those are elements needed both Technology Oriented Teacher Education and through that in
Technical Work then we need some corresponding elements representing the concrete technical
world. The first one can be substance what would be learned in innovative learning process.
2.1. The entity of substance in Technology Education
48
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
According this view of point we have to think what is the substance we are decided to teach in
Technology Education. Probable almost a part of substance of Technology Education already is
comprised to traditional school subjects, but the connections to surrounding technological world are
missing. Then there is plenty of substance, what is not possible to be handled because of their nature
as parts of technological entities. E.g. how could we explain to children and young people how
logistics is functioning, if we don’t study the differences between trucks and other vehicles? How can
we suggest an enhancement if we do not know what is all about? Probably the logistics belongs to
substance of Technology Education because technological society and world is highly depended on
transportation of food and other requisites. Is it good enough if we say that the trucks are coming from
some storage to markets and bringing food for us to buy? And if we don’t se logistics as a part of
transportation we are not able to understand it’s connections to technological world (Hacker & Barden
1988, 437 - 464). How can we do innovations if we cannot understand the substance? Corresponding
examples are thousands.
We know that there are no possibilities to handle these thousands of examples. Therefore innovative
Technology Education cannot be based on direct remembering of separate technical things but some
of them can be certain ”catch in” examples, when we are studying technology. Then, the context of
studies must be formulated as problems. In this case the role of examples seems to have almost two
functions: They are jointing together technological things what usually appears separately (cars and
trucks are driving along the streets and we don’t know why) and in other case we have possibility to
see similarities between different kind of technological problems and how to solve them (according
the inventions on the same truck it is possible to build up different kind of platforms for load). In
technology it is typical to apply same kind solutions for different kind of problems. Innovative action is
to find such kind of applications as well.
The problem of logistics is typical in Technology Education when it’s role is to make clear what is
happening in technological world surrounding us. In role of Technology Education belongs also
capability to prepare children and young people to live in the world of future. Naturally we don’t know
what kind the future will be, but we know that it will demand readiness we are able to teach to our
pupils.
Somebody could say that we don’t need any skills to calculate because we already have calculators
or we don’t need any manual skills because it is not possible to build technological things because of
their complexity. Anyway, if we don’t have capability to calculate without calculator we are not able to
estimate mathematical solutions to technological problems. In the same way if we lose readiness to
develop manual skills we don’t have touch to concrete work. Also our inventions are not realistic.
Because technological world is concrete we must be able to study how it has been done and how it
should be developed. According Black and Harrison (1996) we need some personal attributes to be
capable to learn technology. This should be happen in certain situation what is realistic. The reality of
children and young people should be organised providing them possibilities to make innovations
concerning situation they meet the technological problem.
2.2. Situational empiria of Technology Education
If we try to teach and learn technology in traditional way like reading books and making literary
exercises, technology does not appear in the meaning it’s concrete entity demands. Therefore,
learner must be in physical connection to technology in order to be able to learn the entity of
technology. This means that learning situations must be arranged in a way the learners have
possibility study some concrete problem in some suitable learning situation. According the aims of
Technology Oriented Teacher Education and Technical Work in innovative learning this problem must
be a real problem what is possible to solute as a concrete model, thing, plan, etc. In this case the
problem solving situation is called empiria, because learner must have experiences of the thing
he/she is studying. (Lindh 1997).
At first we should ask how and under what conditions these situational empirias are to be
constructed? Basically, everything is depending on values we prefer in our society (Waks 1994, 35 50). This is also demanding personal attribute what Black and Harrison (1986) called awareness.
Technology we see around us includes thousands of examples we are able to choose as a situational
empiria of Technology Edeucation. Logistics could be one of them, because we all can agree it’s
importance for our everyday life.
49
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
In society based on hi-tech the problems we are interested to solve are easily concerned to hi-tech. It
is easy to forget, that many complex problem in technology seems to have fundamentally a simple
solution, what has been solved long time ago. So it is with logistics as well: thousands of year food
and other things have been delivered to consumers using technology of that time. This is not
prohibiting us to make the innovation of our self. By remembering the historical facts many solutions
to problems will appear in new light.
As we notice, the example of problem of logistics is not easy to define as one technological problem.
It is highly depending of the aims and method we have on it. E.g. if we want to make clear, how much
and in what time it is possible to transport certain product with five truck, math and statistics may be a
suitable method. Or if we want to know, how different kind of trucks are functioning, maybe we could
build some models using knowledge and skills typical for Design Based Technology Education and
Science Based Technology Education as we do in Technology Oriented Teacher Education. But if we
are reaching dissemination in innovative technology learning process we cannot stop on the level of
situational empiria. At the same time personal attributes like resources of knowledge, capability to
perform and awareness of judgements will be developed. These actions can lead us to the level of
theories concerning entities of technology.
2.3. Theories created in Technology Education
Kerlinger (1979, s. 9) has defined a theory as a set of interrelated constructs (concepts), definitions,
and propositions that present a systematic view of phenomena by specifying relations among
variables, with the purpose of explaining and predicting the phenomena. According his definitions a
theory is a set of propositions consisting of defined and interrelated constructs, it sets out the
interrelations among a set of variables, and in so doing, presents a systematic view of phenomena
described by the variables.
When we are learning technology, it is necessary to find out what is the system in situational empiria
we are studying in innovative way. In other case the solution of problem stays separate and it is hard
to apply the technological knowledge we have reached. E.g. if we want to know, how milk is coming
from farmer to producer the system we will find has plenty of similarities with other logistic systems.
These similarities are appearing as a theory, which is constructed of defined concepts and relations
between them. Trough that we are able to create our solutions in realistic meaning.
If we don’t understand similarities behind separate technological systems, it is hard to reach some
technological capability (se Olson & Hansen 1994, 225 - 239). In this case technological capability is
not only manual or scientific skills but capability to understand systems in technology. This
technological capability is near by technological literacy and it is possible to reach it at the level of
general education. Maybe the most essential problem in learning technology is how to reach the level
of technological literacy. The problem is concerning learning methods in Technology Education.
2.4. About the methods used in Technology Education
Maybe the worst difficulties in Technology Education we have concerning methods (se Todd &
McCrory & Todd 1986). As formerly said, it is not profitable to study technology only by reading books
and by that way trying to understand, how systems and things are functioning. It is a slogan: ”If you
want to know, how systems are functioning, do it your self”. This sentence contains the truth that
because technology is appearing as concrete, man made world, the easiest and most effective way to
learn technology is to make technology as innovations.
At general level of education it means that applied theories must be constructed by doing some
systematic studies with real technological equipment. Nowadays there are several kits or
corresponding series for technological modelling but it is also quite possible to create learning
materials by using odds and ends of some ”real” technological equipment. Many times it may be the
most effective and creative way to learn technology because e.g. spear parts are representing the
real technological world.
The highest aim in Technology Education could be the level of inventions. If we want the learner to be
able to make inventions relation between Design Based Technology Education and Science Based
50
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Technology Education will be crucial. Then, the methods used in Technical Work and Physics are
suitable methods in Technology Education as well. It is not enough that learners only make some
design proceedings or some calculations concerning capabilities of technological construction, but
both of those should be used. Usually it means that giftedness of one learner does not reach to
create certain technological equipment, but the aim is to be reached by doing team work. In that kind
of innovative action the social skills will have a remarkable role.
In this case we know that when we are learning technology in innovative way we should have some
technological substance learned using suitable methods at the level of situational empiria so that it
would be understood as a theory or theories comprising essential concepts needed to explain the
result of innovative action.
2.5. How to combine substance, situational empiria, theory and methods?
In modern society technology is concerning everything in everyday life (Fig. 1). It’s expression is
substance in concrete and abstract level. Concrete substance in technology consists of things,
appliances and structures. Abstract substance in technology consists of theories and plans. In
innovative technology education substance is in connection with education. In the beginning of
learning process we have to decide what is the part of substance we want to concentrate, because it
is not possible to choice all substance to be learned at once. So, we have to create a situational
empiria according the aims of education and methods to be used in it. Still we can not exclude the
possibility that during the pedagogical process there will be some essential things of substance
supposed to be joint to process. Therefore the interaction between substance of technology
education and situational empiria is relatively constant (arrows with two head). According of
situational empiria and concepts it has revealed it is possible to create theories in technology
education. These theories will consist of concepts and relations between them. When theory (or
theoretical view of some phenomena in technology) is understandable it is possible to joint it into
substance to enlarge and enrich it (the arrow down) . (Lindh, 1997; Lindh, 2000)
If we look at figure 1 we can estimate that it is applicable not only in Technology Education but in
many other of area of knowing. If we want to learn the entity of some area of knowledge we should
be able to estimate the quality of substance. Then we should be able to give some typical examples
on it. According to this example (or many other examples) we could find some similarities by
detecting concepts, which are typical for certain area of knowledge. If we really want to learn and
understand the phenomena we are studying, we should have some suitable method. It should be
organising both the formulation of situational empiria and the theory we will find out trough the
concepts and relations between them.
Why then this structure is suitable for innovative Technology Education? The main reason is the logic
of technology. All technological systems and things have construction, which is logical. So, the
explanation of technological entities must be logical. Therefore we always should try to reach
functions and similarities between which are to be estimated at the same way.
Society
Theories
51
Concept
1
Concept
2
Methods like:
Experiments
Hands on active
Education in
Technology
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Fig. 1. The structure of learning in the connection of Innovation Education and Technology Education
One could ask, what about the ‘funny ideas and inventions’? They are important, if we are on the
level of inventions. But these ideas are to be realized and they must have logical (technological)
explanation. For that reason highest level of Technology Education could have learning climate,
where inventive and logical situations are turning. Maybe this would be the most effective way to
connect Design Based Technology Education and Science Based Technology Education.
At the level of separate phenomena as logistics the theory described here seems to function
faultlessly. However, its power may appear in whole meaning when it is considered in the connection
of projects described above. If we se curriculum as a description of learning process which is realized
as a project, this theory is fitting on it as well.
The curriculum of Technology Oriented Teacher Education is constructed as a combination of Design
Based Technology Education and Science Based Technology Education. Different courses of
Technical Work are then representing Design Based Technology Education and Science courses in
corresponding way Science Based Technology Education.
3. Innovation Education in Technology Oriented Teacher Education as an
application of theory
As formerly has showed the theory above suits for both logistics and projects typical in Technology
Education. The Technology Oriented Teacher Education Programme makes it possible to apply
theory to practice through school subjects and the technological substance comprised in them. New
technological substance will be developed according to the theory as well.
On the basis of theory it is possible to organise some of the essential principles of the Technology
Oriented Teacher Education Programme. Similarly to the structure shown in figure 1 the starting point
is provided by the substance. In situational empiry we focus on new technology and the connections
between Science Based Technology Education and Design Based Technology Education. By using
52
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
innovative methods it is possible to offer a broader perspective of Innovative Technology Education.
On the theoretical level it puts the notions of entrepreneurial education, information technology and
math & science in connection with Technology Education (see Lindh 1997).
Now, we can ask where is the place of Innovation Education in Technology Oriented Teacher
Education? According Black and Harrison (1986) there are resources, capability and awareness to be
distinguished as personal attributes. If the substance is representing the material conditions needed
in innovative action resources are representing abstract conditions of person doing innovative work.
So are capability and awareness as well. In Technology Oriented Teacher Education the facilities
concerning material conditions according curricula are relatively good but then we need some spirit
which is in resources, capability and awareness.
Rosa Gunnarsdottir (2001, s. 234) mentioned that pedagogical activity in Innovation Education has
turned out to be complex. She find the conclusion to se the innovative process happening both
individual and social level. It seems to be the same in this theory as well. In figure 1 concrete and
abstract substance and methods are representing the social level. Situational empiria and theory
created by learner are representing the individual level. Gunnarsdottirs’ finding that Innovation
Education can be regarded as ‘community of practice’ is fitting also to the theory in figure 1.
Substance in it self can guarantee the connection to practice but the connection to human resources,
capability and awareness are making possible to evaluate what substance would be choice to the
level of situational empiria.
In conclusion
Technology education is not a school subject in Finland, but it is a new branch in general education
as a subject matter. In the last few years its importance has been understood, as the Finnish society
is highly dependent on technology commercially and from the viewpoint of everyday life as well. This
is the main reason why the Faculty of Education at the University of Oulu has chosen the Technology
Oriented Teacher Education Programme as one of the alternative lines in teacher education. To
regard innovative Technology Education as a flexible combination of learning projects offers a
possibility to use theory suitable for different kind technological substance, both concrete and
abstract. Through that it also offers a possibility to create innovative environment for technological
activities of children and young people. Further, it makes possible to unite Technical Work and
Sciences in a form of Science Based Technology Education and Design Based Technology
Education in extensive meaning.
References
Best, J. 1977. Research in Education. Third edition. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.
Black, P. & Harrison, G. 1986. Technological capability. In Anita Cross and Bob McCormick (eds.)
Technology in Schools s. 130 – 136. Philadelphia: Open University Press.
Gunnarsdottir, R. 2001. Innovation Education: Defining the Phenomenon. Doctoral dissertation.
The University of Leeds. School of Education.
Hacker, M. & Barden, R. 1988. Living with technology. New Tork: Delmar
technology series.
Jenkins, E. 1997. Scientific and technological literacy. In D. Layton (ed.) Innovations in science
and technology education: UNESCO:
Kerlinger, F. 1979. Foundations of Behavioral Research. New York: Holt, Rinehart and
Winston.
Lindh, M. 1997. Teknologiakasvatus tekniseen yleissivistykseen ohjaavana tiedon- ja
taidonalana teknisen työn viitekehyksessä. (Technology Education as a
medium to enhance all-round education in technology; In the Context of
Technical Work). Licentiate thesis (Not available in English). Oulu University. Faculty of
Education.
Lindh, M. 2000. Master of Education, Technology oriented teacher education
programme - Theoretical background and an example of its application. In
Kumpulainen, K. In search of powerful learning environments for teacher
education in 21st century. ActaUniversitatis Ouluensis. E 39. University of Oulu.
Olson, J. & Hansen, K. 1994. Research on technology education. In Layton, D.
Innovations in science and technology education. Vol.V. UNESCO.
53
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Todd, R. & McCrory, D. & Todd, K. 1986. Understanding and Using Technology.
A Guide for Teachers. Worcester: Davis.
UNESCO. 1983. Science and technology education and national development. Paris:
Scientific and Cultural Organization.
Waks, L. 1994. Value Judgement and Social Acktion in Technology Studies. In Jenkins,
E.(ed.). International Journal of Technology and Design Education. 4:1.
Dordrecht: Kluwer.
Keywords: Innovation, Innovation Education, technology education, technological literacy, design
technology, science and technology, technical work, natural sciences, curriculum.
Innovation Education has been one of the essential aims in Technology Oriented Teacher Education
during two years. We believe that it is most effective to learn technology by making technology.
Because technology is result of innovative activities Innovation Education is fitting to our curriculum in
Technology Education. We also believe that dissemination of innovative thinking is most effective
when it will be started in teacher training. Then, the becoming teachers can start Innovation
Education with their pupils on primary level in Technology Education. For that reason we have
integrated Technology Education and Innovation Education in teacher training.
As a theoretical result we have come to structure describing a model of learning in Technology
Education. Because innovative action has become an essential part of Technology Oriented Teacher
Education Innovation Education is integrated to Technology Education on theoretical level as well.
Title: Creativity
By: Matti Hasari Teacher of Physics, Chemistry, Mathematics, IT and Technology
University Teacher Training School
Oulu
Creativity and intelligence have always been tied together. Many researchers have tried to pull them
apart from each other and then tried to split them into smaller factors to make the analysis easier.
This kind of mathematical approach to the problem area has led to systems where the lists of
concepts are given to define intelligence and creativity. This kind of definitions have caused that also
the object, human and his mind is split into parts and the whole human has been forgotten. In the
following presentation I am trying to find some solutions to that problem and see them through
Innovation Education. I am also trying to find some explanation to the problem how to develop
creativity and intelligence with Information Technology. At the end of presentation I am mixing
emotions into creativity and intelligence and trying to find explanation how they are affecting
consciously and unconsciously to the innovation process
Defining creativity and intelligence in innovation Education in a democratic way gives to the definition
a wider approach. This leads to conclusion that every child has creativity and she/he has talent and
those are coming up when doing innovations. The innovation is something special that belongs to the
child and it is a part of his/her humanity so teachers and other elder people must be careful when
appraising and criticizing them. The constructions and drawings show some glimpse from child’s mind
that is valuable to him/her so it must be cared tenderly and with love.
Information Technology has its possibilities when dealing with creativity. It can give the child a new
approach to learning that contains autonomy witch leads into the deeper learning. Learning must be
more pupil-centred so that the pupils are doing work and the teacher is just providing the possibilities
the learning to happen. This new teaching and teacher model must be shown to students who are
participating teacher training. The Web based teaching and learning technology must be developed to
the direction where the social contacts can be taken into account more effectively because the pupils
are constructing their mind through those contacts.
Emotions and feelings must be taken into account when dealing with creativity and further innovation.
Emotional intelligence is one part of the wholeness of the intelligence and creativity. It matters always
very much what is your self-confidence and your initiative how are you communicating and what kind
of feelings you are delivering to others.
54
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Finally when we put the possibilities of information technology as a planning area and the child
working with his/her own hands when constructing different kind of prototypes or products, we are
nurturing the pupil as a whole person and I think the ‘product‘ could be better than before.
Title: What creativity isn’t – questioning clarity
By: Howard Gibson School of Education Bath Spa University College
The term creativity has entered educational parlance in the UK in a big way. But, like the chic lexicon
of a previous decade, the term is prone to ambiguity. The push to ‘lever up standards’, the quest to
‘deliver entitlement’, to adopt a ‘balanced approach’ towards the teaching of reading (in order to
ratchet up the phonics), the ubiquitous praise for ‘structure’ (whosoever sells it), and so on, are
equivalent terms that have had wide press but have contained ambiguous and unshared meanings.
Creativity is such a term, widely used, full of promise, a tonic for some after a decade of national
over-governance of the school curriculum, a glimmer of hope and, like ‘freedom’, a hurrah word to
which everyone can wholeheartedly agree. However, what it actually means is a little less clear. What
this paper tries to do is give examples of how the term is used in practice - in a selection of
discourses from the Government’s Expecting the Unexpected to Coca Cola’s recent quest for a
creative teacher to manage their educational division – with the aim of demonstrating how diverse it’s
meanings are. It then suggests what creativity should not be – not a signal to return to the naïve and
discredited philosophy of the liberal child-centred individualism of the 60s; not an instrumental term –
in the sense of Adorno and Horkheimer’s notion of instrumental rationality - that can be filled with any
content and used in any cultural, political or moral context; not a term conceptually distinct from
criticism (although currently collocated much more commonly with terms like ‘innovation’ and
‘vibrancy’), and so on. The paper has elements of discourse analysis, bits of philosophy and –
hopefully - a laugh.
Title: Teacher education, creativity and ICT: One antipodean perspective
By: Anthony Jones Department of Mathematics and Science Education
Faculty of Education University of Melbourne
Creativity is the latest of a number of terms that have been used to explain connections between
cognitive processes and educational applications of ICT. While not necessarily the first, Papert and
many of the early users of Logo saw the possibility of engaging the minds of learners with and
through the new computer technology. Since then there have been unbelievable advances in both
computer hardware and software. However methods for learning with and about creativity do not
appear to have been refined or developed to the same extent, and are still not integral parts of
mainstream classroom practice, curriculum development or teacher education.
While there have been commissioned reports to the UK government about the potential of ICT in
helping teachers teach creatively and learners to be creative, less appears to be occurring in
Australian school curricula and classrooms. In addition the majority of new entrants in pre-service
teacher education courses have had limited experience as students in using the range of ICT now
available to schools. A number of approaches being tried with pre-service teachers, aimed at
establishing a nexus between creativity in the classroom and ICT, will be described in this paper.
Title: Creativity In the Curriculum: what does this mean and why is it so important?
By: Emma Watson School of Education University of Leeds
I believe that all people are capable of creative achievement, creative abilities are needed in all types
of work and indeed it is also about choices and route-finding in everyday life. I maintain that the most
dynamic and rapidly expanding areas of the world economies are so because of creative thinking.
My focus is on creativity in the classroom; education is seen as the main way of enabling individuals
and nations alike to developing creative thinkers to meet emerging global needs: rapid economic and
55
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
social change. I concentrate upon creative thinking; innovative ideas, imagination and the
interdependence of convergent and divergent thinking in intellectual creativity and their impact on
teaching and learning.
The role and expectations held of the teacher and an examination of the experiences that learners
need to be exposed to in order to develop as creative thinkers is explored. As it is not acceptable nor
desirable to leave this area of development to chance, I also explore structured creativity
development programmes both to highlight the skills and processes involved in creative thinking and
to demonstrate that effective creative thinking can be taught.
Title: Models of ‘creative partnership’: implications for teachers, institutions and curriculum
management
By: Graham Jeffery Newham Sixth Form College University of East London
Drawing on case study evidence from NewVIc’s NESTA-funded “Pathways into Creativity” project, I
will share some key findings from the project to date.
These include:

The management of institutional collaboration and cross-agency working– issues and
tensions

The networked curriculum: managing the boundaries and connecting territories

Emergent professional roles for teachers as ‘social entrepreneurs’ and ‘cultural
intermediaries’: problems and potentials

Creating learning and professional pathways with and for ‘disadvantaged’ students – the role
of creativity, arts activity and sustained relationship-building with arts and cultural
organisations
The work draws on theories of social and cultural capital and situates the idea of creative partnership
firmly in the context of debates about urban schooling, ‘the learning city’ and community regeneration.
It draws upon NewVIc’s extensive network of relationships with local and regional arts and media
organisations including the partners of the Stratford Cultural Quarter, the University of East London,
and a growing set of international partners. There is a strong emphasis within UK further and higher
education upon developing ‘partnerships for progression’, offering supported routes into HE or skilled
employment for non-traditional entrants through the development of cross-sector partnerships
between HEIs and the community, voluntary sector and schools/FE. Linked to this is the question of
how best to develop talent and capability within the creative industries sector, in particular through
business support, mentoring and development frameworks for emerging professionals in the creative
industries, before, during and after their involvement with formal education.
The processes and programmes that have been developed between NewVIc and its partners may
offer some ‘prototype’ models for developing the new forms of collaboratively delivered arts learning
programme that will be required in the future, if a more diverse range of young people are to make
successful transitions into higher education and professional activity in the creative industries.
Graham Jeffery was Creative Industries Development Manager at Newham Sixth Form College
(NewVIc) and is currently seconded to the University of East London as Senior Lecturer in Cultural
and Innovation Studies. He has acted as Course Tutor for NewVIc/UEL’s HND in Performing Arts in
the Community programme and is currently co-ordinating a new BA (Hons) in Music Cultures: theory
and production which has been developed jointly by UEL and NewVIc. In autumn 2004 Trentham
Books will publish the results of the Pathways into Creativity study in the form of a book entitled The
Creative College: building a successful learning culture in the arts. For more information about the
Pathways into Creativity project please visit
http://www.nesta.org.uk/ourawardees/profiles/1985/02_profile.html or www.newvic.ac.uk
56
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Title: Simulations As Mental Tools For Network-Based Group Learning In Innovation &
Electronics Technology.
By: Tom Page Loughborough University; Gisli Thorsteinsson Iceland University of
Education; Miika Lehtonen University of Lapland
The article presents pedagogical and technological applications developed and studied as
part of the research project “Web-supported Mental Tools in Innovative Technology
Education”. The applications allow simulation tools, modern network-based solutions that
support learning, and other mental tools, as well as traditional and modern digital learning
materials, to be smoothly integrated into normal teaching-studying-learning activity. Two
case studies were undertaken as part of this work: one inside of the InnoEd virtual learning
environment and the pedagogical orientation agent for teaching electronics (POA). For
example, efforts have been made make use of edutainment as part of the nature of tools and
materials and game-like interactivity to enhance the learning process. The broader framework
for the model of learning activity that is being developed and studied in this work centers on
the question how and through which learning activity (learning process) study and learning in
the field of innovation and in electric technology and electronics (technical work and
technology education) can be organized to take into account the challenges posed by the
postindustrial information society.
Key words: Distance Learning, Games, Learning Models, Research, Simulation, Technical
Innovation, Virtual Learning Environment
Title: Independent Watershed Assessment Project(s)
By: Frederic R. Wilson Huntingdon Area Middle School Pennsylvania
This study focused on ascertaining the water quality of Standing Stone Creek and determining
whether an environmental health issue exists that would prevent the stream from being Huntingdon's
potable water supply. To achieve this, a stream assessment was conducted at four sites. A
questionnaire was also developed to obtain input about the environmental healthiness of the water
from the perspective of personnel of the
Huntingdon Water Treatment Plant.
Stream assessment parameters included examining and evaluating:
• Biological organisms
• Chemical analysis
• Physical characteristics
• Stream habitat
• Riparian buffers
A partnership of the school district, Conservation District, Juniata College, and Pennsylvania League
of Women Voters was created to complete this project.
Unique is that the study was cross-grade, involving middle school, high school, and college students.
Time for the project required student release from school during the regular scheduled day, after
school, and weekend participation.
Finished projects related to the study included a traditional research document, an educational poster
display, a presentation to borough council of findings and recommendations, Power Point
presentation, and regional television presentation.
57
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
Subsequent to this study four other watershed assessments have been
completed with the resulted submitted/accepted by the state department of environmental protection.
58
Financial Agreement number 90138-CP-1-2001-1-MINERVA
59