Understanding Educational
Innovation
Professional Practice Module
Dr Sue Wharton
A starting point: Systems Theory
Or, more briefly put:
Systems theory is an interdisciplinary field of
science, which studies the nature of complex
systems in nature, society and science, and
studies complex parts of reality as systems.
It has been applied in many social fields, e.g. Family Systems
Theory:
… a theory … that suggests that individuals cannot be
understood in isolation from one another, but rather as a part of
their family, as the family is an emotional unit. Families are
systems of interconnected and interdependent individuals, none
of whom can be understood in isolation from the system.
A family is a system in which each member had a role to play and
rules to respect. Members of the system are expected to
respond to each other in a certain way according to their role,
which is determined by relationship agreements. Within the
boundaries of the system, patterns develop as certain family
member's behaviour is caused by and causes other family
member's behaviours in predictable ways.
http://www.genopro.com/genogram/family-systems-theory/
• How do you think these ideas are used in
education? And particularly, in the study of
educational innovation?
Clarke (2003, 2007) relates systems theory to educational
change:
“Systems are all living organisms and stable groups of living organisms,
from single cell organisms to plants and animals. The individual human
being is the system we are most interested in, along with families,
classrooms, schools and communities, which are also systems. Systems
are assemblages of parts that function as a whole. They can be
characterized as goal seeking, or self organising; that is, they seem to
function with an identifiable purpose. At the same time, they are open
to information from their environments. In part because of this tension
between internal and external control, their behaviour is not strictly
predictable. It is patterned, however, and if we observe systems over a
period of time we will notice that they exhibit behaviours that permit
us to guess with a high probability of success what is going to happen
next.” (Clarke 2003: 15).
Does the above sound to you like a plausible description of a
classroom?
Clarke’s six principles for understanding systems: (2003 ch1, 2007 ch10)
Systems have no purpose
We cannot control systems
Systems cannot be changed unilaterally
Systems function in cycles
Systems function in response to internal and external information
Systems function towards stability
Systems respond to disturbances in ways that, if not precisely predictable, are still
expectable
Open systems require a budget of flexibility
Systems cannot be understood independently of their contexts
The world consists of systems within systems within systems
Again, can we apply these principles to the idea of a class as a system?
What does systems theory imply for
understanding how educational innovation
works?
‘Math attack’ case study
This activity, taken from Clarke 2003 (86-91) is
intended to help us think about what makes an
educational change such as a course innovation
more likely to succeed or fail…
Innovation characteristics likely to enhance or reduce
the possibility of adoption:
Relative advantage: the degree to which an innovation is perceived as better than the
idea it supersedes…
Compatibility: the degree to which an innovation is perceived as being consistent with
the existing values, past experiences and needs of potential adopters…
Complexity: the degree to which an innovation is perceived as difficult to understand
and use…
Trialability: the degree to which an innovation may be experimented with on a limited
basis….
Observability: the degree to which the results of an innovation are visible to others.
(Rogers 2003: 15-16, discussed in Waters 2009: 426).
Do any of these ideas explain the mixed result of the Maths innovation?
What is likely to happen?
Rogers 2003: Change adopter categories
Each group can be seen as categorised by a certain psychological disposition towards
innovation:
Innovators: Venturesome, exploratory; characteristically pro-innovation in their
orientation
Early adopters: Interested, willing to experiment; also pro-innovation but not
necessarily innovators themselves
Early Majority: Deliberative, cautious; have a tendency to adopt a ‘wait and see’
approach to innovation adoption
Late Majority: Sceptical; tend to adopt a critical attitude to the value of potential
innovations
Laggards: Traditional; have a preference for the status (ante) quo.
(Rogers 2003: 282-285 as discussed in Waters 2009: 438).
Can you think of colleagues and students of yours who fit into these categories?
Educational cultures in which teachers work
Transmission based
Interpretation based
Knowledge is clearly
defined and there is
one right answer to
almost any question
What knowledge is
The purpose of
education is to learn
knowledge
The purpose of
education
Knowledge is dynamic and is arrived at
through discussion
---------
The purpose of education is to learn
how to learn
---------
Learners are members
of a group and speak
only when spoken to
Teachers are the
initiators of classroom
activity and should
know all the answers
Learners
---------
Teachers
---------
Learners are a collection of individuals
who are expected to express
themselves
Teachers are there to support learners’
participation in the learning process
and can admit ignorance
What are the interrelating subsystems in which your innovation will
have to operate?
Diagram from Kennedy 1988 in Waters 2009:
Cultural
Political
Administrative
Educational
Institutional
Classroom
Innovation