Innovation is crucial for higher education to ensure high-quality curricula that address the changing needs of students, labor markets, and society as a whole. Substantial amounts of resources and enthusiasm are devoted to innovations, but often they do not yield the desired changes. This may be due to unworkable goals, too much complexity, and a lack of resources to institutionalize the innovation. In many cases, innovations end up being less sustainable than expected or hoped for. In the long term, the disappointing revenues of innovations hamper the ability of higher education to remain future proof. Against the background of this need to increase the success of educational innovations, our colleague Klaartje van Genugten has explored the literature on innovations to reveal mechanisms that contribute to the sustainability of innovations. Her findings are synthesized in this report. They are particularly meaningful for directors of education programs, curriculum committees, educational consultants, and policy makers, who are generally in charge of defining the scope and set up of innovations. Her report offers a comprehensive view and provides food for thought on how we can strive for future-proof and sustainable innovations. I therefore recommend reading this report.
DOCUMENT
Educational innovations often tend to fail, mainly because teachers and school principals do not feel involved or are not allowed to have a say. Angela de Jong's dissertation shows the importance of school principals and teachers leading 'collaborative innovation' together. Collaborative innovation requires a collaborative, distributed approach involving both horizontal and vertical working relationships in a school. Her research shows that teams with more distributed leadership have a more collaborative 'spirit' to improve education. Team members move beyond formal (leadership) roles, and work more collectively on school-wide educational improvement from intrinsic motivation. De Jong further shows that school principals seek a balance in steering and providing space. She distinguished three leadership patterns: Team Player, Key Player, Facilitator. Team players in particular are important for more collaborative innovation in a school. They balance between providing professional space to teachers (who look beyond their own classroom) and steering for strategy, frameworks, boundaries, and vision. This research took place in schools working with the program of Foundation leerKRACHT, a program implemented by more than a thousand schools (primary, secondary, and vocational education). The study recommends, towards school principals and teachers, and also towards trainers, policymakers, and school board members, to reflect more explicitly on their roles in collaborative innovation and talk about those roles.
DOCUMENT
Second career teachers (SCT) are key role models in vocational education (VE) because they prepare students for the vocational practice they were part of, and they bring up-to-date vocational knowledge and skills into VE schools. Therefore, the early leaving of SCTs in VE is a problem, adding to the worldwide teacher shortages. Induction programs have been developed to support starting teachers to grow into their new profession and to diminish high attrition rates. However, it is argued that current induction programs fail to support SCTs adequately. For instance, induction programs rarely adapt to SCTs’ various needs, such as recognizing and integrating previously developed competencies and specific backgrounds. Further-more, SCTs’ induction programs in the specific context of VE are largely under-studied. This study explores the experiences of SCTs in VE during their induction programs regarding four themes identified in research on SCTs in other education sectors: 1) professional identity development, 2) learning processes, 3) tailor-made coaching, and 4) co-creation of induction programs. Eleven SCTs from eight Dutch VE schools were interviewed. The data show a rich variation of SCTs’ experiences. For example, they experienced the opportunity to develop their professional identity as teachers while preserving and including their former identity as practitioners of the vocation they teach for. Yet, only a few SCTs experienced co-creation of the induction program, which seems to have a positive impact. The insights of this study offer an understanding of what SCTs in VE go through and what might support them during their induction.
LINK
The central aim of this thesis was to increase understanding of designing vocational learning environments at the school–work boundary. Four studies were conducted, focusing on learning environment designs at the school–work boundary and on design considerations of the actors involved in their construction, both from the world of school and the world of work.
DOCUMENT
Nomination Best Research & Practice Project Award at the EAPRIL conference, Jyväskylä, Finland. Hybrid forms of learning environments in vocational education are central to the two projects of this application: a design-oriented, applied research project from the Centre for Expertise in Vocational Education (ecbo-project) and an educational innovation/practitioner-research project (hpboproject). A PhD-research project is closely related.
DOCUMENT
In 2001, higher professional education received a research function by law. This new research role is incorporated into so-called lectureships. In these lectureships, which are analogous to university chairs to some degree, experts in specific fields function as intermediaries between higher professional education and the networked knowledge society. Their role is to 1) develop and distribute knowledge, 2) provide human resource development for teachers, 3) improve the curriculum, and 4) support innovation in business and non-profit organisations. This contribution presents the preliminary results of a participative action research in the lectureship Pedagogy of vocational and professional education. The aim of this research is to help professionals in this lectureship develop a research identity as part of their professional development and as such constituent for their innovations. Our research question is: how can we improve their professional development as action researchers and consequently their innovative practices? We present first an overview of the Dutch debate about the new research role. Then we will focus on our own Institution and its HRM policies on research. Third, we describe the School as Career Centre and our translation of its design rules into our lectureship. Then we give a historical account of our lectureship, followed by an outline of the action research we, the professor and senior researcher, conduct and of how we try to help the professionals in our lectureship. We conclude with some general remarks about the new research role for higher professional education.
DOCUMENT
In our work as lecturers, teachers, researchers, coaches or managers in a university of applied sciences, we do feel that the amount and variety of societal challenges on higher vocational education (HVE) is growing. Institutions in HE are in a process of transforming from traditional ‘either or’ research or education institutions into more complex hybrid knowledge institutions. Nowadays, universities of applied sciences (as institutions for HVE) in The Netherlands have three main objectives: providing education, conducting practice-oriented research to add to the professional knowledge base, and contributing to innovation in the professional fields of work. Education, research and innovation form the three pillars in the strategy of Dutch Universities of Applied Sciences (Educational Council of The Netherlands, 2015). These changing societal demands form an impetus for educational reform and innovation at both organizational and individual employee levels (Cummings & Shin, 2014). Changes in context and roles lead to questions: As a teacher/lecturer/researcher, how do I relate to the different stakeholders? What is the real meaning of being a ‘good’ lecturer or researcher in creating added values, and for whom? Some propose that the new challenges concern everybody and thus should be everyone’s job. But when everything becomes everyone’s job, how can we really realize the required added values? Others promote a more differentiated approach of accurately fitting talents and tasks to create the flow and employee satisfaction that is needed to realize the desired outcomes. But then how do we work together and cooperate with such an individualistic approach? These opposing positions in the discourse concern the question of how to define the ‘professional me’ amongst the ‘we’. In other words, the challenge is how we define and navigate our professional identities within the context of a dynamic multiple-identity organization with increasing pressures for professional diversity (Foreman & Whetten, 2002; Aangenendt, 2015).
DOCUMENT
Educational institutions and vocational practices need to collaborate to design learning environments that meet current-day societal demands and support the development of learners’ vocational competence. Integration of learning experiences across contexts can be facilitated by intentionally structured learning environments at the boundary of school and work. Such learning environments are co-constructed by educational institutions and vocational practices. However, co-construction is challenged by differences between the practices of school and work, which can lead to discontinuities across the school–work boundary. More understanding is needed about the nature of these discontinuities and about design considerations to counterbalance these discontinuities. Studies on the co-construction of learning environments are scarce, especially studies from the perspective of representatives of work practice. Therefore, the present study explores design considerations for co-construction through the lens of vocational practice. The study reveals a variety of discontinuities related to the designable elements of learning environments (i.e. epistemic, spatial, instrumental, temporal, and social elements). The findings help to improve understanding of design strategies for counterbalancing discontinuities at the interpersonal and institutional levels of the learning environment. The findings confirm that work practice has a different orientation than school practice since there is a stronger focus on productivity and on the quality of the services provided. However, various strategies for co-construction also seem to take into account the mutually beneficial learning potential of the school–work boundary.
LINK
The main objective of this dissertation is to examine, both theoretically and empirically, the specific requirements of a blended learning instructional model aimed at facilitating higher education adult-learners into online interaction. Three objectives were formulated: Objective 1: to investigate adult-learners’ perceived satisfaction in relation to blended learning and the factors that foster their interaction with the ‘added’ online mode; and a thorough understanding of adult-learners’ educational needs and learning characteristics derived from theory. Objective 2: to understand the factors of social presence and convergence, and how these can be ingrained into design principles that foster online interaction. Objective 3: to explore the specifics of an instructional model for the design of a blended learning environment for adult-learners in higher education, both theoretically and empirically, and how said principles can be actualised in a validated model.
DOCUMENT
Symposiumbijdrage conferentie EARLI SIG 14, 11-14 september 2018, Genève Learning across the contexts of school and the workplace is highly relevant to the VET-sector. This contribution analyses these cross-contextual learning processes with three key issues in mind: (1) guidance by vocational educators, (2) assessment of students’ development and (3) design of VET-learning environments. Guidance, assessment and overarching VET-curriculum designs form the basis for constructive alignment as an approach to optimize conditions for high quality cross-contextual learning processes. We used the theoretical framework of boundary crossing to clarify the complex, multilevel nature of these key issues.
DOCUMENT
