EDUCATIONAL INNOVATION AND TECHNOLOGY
Ключевые слова:
Educational innovation, technology, learning, teaching, creative class.Аннотация
The purpose of this article is to discuss why and how pedagogical practices and technologies need to be integrated at all levels in order to improve meaningful student learning. The first attempt to define pedagogical innovations with reference to the Creative Class Room (CCR) structure is presented. Within the CCR, innovation is seen as a deliberate activity taking place in a specific social, economic, technological, organizational and cultural context, designed to solve unresolved problems, and involving complex interactions between different actors who actively seek to learn from each other. From this perspective, pedagogical innovation, given the technological and digital learning environment, is a matter of integrating different levels of analysis, from the individual to the social and from traditional to the most innovative teaching and learning practices. It also discusses the need for a better understanding of how people learn and how technology should be used to enhance that learning, and concludes with a discussion of how creativity and innovation should face the “mundane” everyday challenges in the educational environment.
Библиографические ссылки
Armstrong W., Barnes S., Sutherland R., Curran S., Mills S. and Thompson I., 2005. Collaborative research methodology in teaching and learning: using the interactive whiteboard. , "Educational Review", Vol. 57(4), pp. 457-469, http :// dx . doi . org /10.1080/00131910500279551.
Beauchamp, G., 2004. “Using the Interactive Whiteboard by Teachers in Primary Schools: Towards an Effective Transition Structure,” Technology Pedagogy and Education, vol. 3(3), pp. 337-348, http :// dx . doi . org /10.1080/ 14759390400200189.
Bocconi S., Campilis P.G. and Pugni Y., 2012. Innovative Learning: Key Elements for the Development of Creative Classes in Europe, Luxembourg: European Union Publications Office.
Calvani A., 2012. Technology and Schools: Present, Future, Accountability, Ricercazione, Vol. 4(2), pp. 285-290.
CERI, 2010. Are students succeeding in the new millennium? Technology Use and Educational Efficiency in PISA, Paris: OECD.
Cooper, J.R., 1998. A Multidimensional Approach to Innovation, Leadership Decision, vol. 36(8), pp. 493–502, http :// dx . doi . org /10.1108/00251749810232565.
Coke M. and Marshall G., 2007. The Impact of ICT: Do We Know What We Should Know?, Journal of Educational and Information Technology, vol. 12, pp. 59-70, http :// dx . doi . org /10.1007/s 10639-007-9032 -x.
Donovan M.S. and Bransford, D.D., 2005. How Students Learn. History, Math, and Science in the Classroom, Washington, DC: National academic Press.
Fullan M., 2011. Reform of the entire system for innovative teaching and learning, at Microsoft - ITLResearch ( Ed.), Innovative Research in Teaching and Learning: Findings and Implications 2011 (pp. 30-39), Microsoft - Partnersin Education. Available at: http :// download. microsoft. com / download / C /4/5/ C 45 EB 9 D 7-7685-4 AFD -85 B 3- DC 66 F 79277 AB / ITLResearh 2011 Findings. pdf. [Retrieved 10/20/12].
Gentile M., and Pisanu F., 2012. Boards. interactive multimedia, digital perception experience and holding a class-owned. Research report of the RED 5 project, Trento: Provincia Autonomous Publishing of Trento.
Gentile M., Pisanu F., Gaetani M.R., Filosi G., Campreger S., 2013. Teaching and learning technologies, School of Italian Moderna, vol. 120 (10), pp. 59-62/ 86-88.
Gentile M., 2012. Project Classes 2.0: Integration of proprietary technology in didactics of Italian and _ Mathematics. rap port middle level, Trento: Department owned by Knowledge
Glover D. and Miller D., 2001. Working with Technology: The Pedagogical Impact of Large-Scale Interactive Whiteboard Implementation in a High School, Journal of Information Technology for Teacher Education, Vol. 10(3), pp. 257-276, http :// dx . doi . org /10.1080/ 14759390100200115 .
Glover D. and Miller D. 2009 Optimizing the use of interactive whiteboards: Applying Development Research ( DWR ) in the United Kingdom, Professional Development in Education, Vol. 35(3), pp. 469-483, http :// dx . doi . org /10.1080/19415250902731553 .
Griffenhagen C., 2000. Whiteboard Technology Report: A Published Report, Oxford: Computing Lab.
Hattie, JAC, 2009. Visible learning: a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses on achievement, New York, NY: Routledge.
Jones S. and Tanner H., 2002. “Teachers Interpret Effective Interactive Whole-Class Teaching in Middle Math Classrooms,” Educational Research, Vol. 28, no. 3, pp. 265-274, http :// dx. doi. org /10.1080/0305569022000003717.
Campilis P.G., Bocconi S., Pugni Y., 2012. Towards a cartographic framework of innovation for ICT-enabled learning, Luxembourg: European Union Publications Bureau.
Latane B., 2002. Focused Interactive Learning: A Tool for Active Classroom Discussion, Teaching Psychology, Vol. 28(1), pp. 10-16.
