Group items tagged

Organizations maximize innovation if they embrace distributed leadership that truly amplifies opportunities for anyone in the organization to imagine, prototype, and build on new ideas. 

nnovative schools focus on teaching each individual user, not on the process of content transfer.  Differentiated learning, truly adapting the learning experience to the needs of the student-user, leveraged through the differentiated resources of the teacher-user, will be the tsunami of educational change in the next decade.

uccessfully innovating organizations make numerous bets, many of which are small, and some of which shoot for the moon.

There will be more innovation—but it will not change the way the world works in the way electricity, internal-combustion engines, plumbing, petrochemicals and the telephone have. Mr Cowen is more willing to imagine big technological gains ahead, but he thinks there are no more low-hanging fruit. Turning terabytes of genomic knowledge into medical benefit is a lot harder than discovering and mass producing antibiotics.

But Pierre Azoulay of MIT and Benjamin Jones of Northwestern University find that, though there are more people in research, they are doing less good. T

One factor in this may be the “burden of knowledge”: as ideas accumulate it takes ever longer for new thinkers to catch up with the frontier of their scientific or technical speciality. Mr Jones says that, from 1985 to 1997 alone, the typical “age at first innovation” rose by about one year.

Researching What for Why? I enjoy research. I spend much of my time reading it. I also often find myself in sustained and vigorous conversations with colleagues from some of the leading research institutions from around the world...and it's time that I value very much. Indeed, the Foundation maintains a register of some of the leading research around 1-to-1 on our site....however, I am also sick and tried of the unrelenting practice of political leaders and educational policy makers who continually seek to justify inaction and limit the scope for innovation in the name of research. One only has to review the mountains of literature around the most effective ways to teach reading and the efficacy of small classes to conclude that too much educational research is based on loose assumptions, inappropriate methodologies, a blatant lack of rigor and ideological bias. Too often the funding base for educational research creates preconceptions about the outcomes, real or perceived, and the volume of research that swamps the education market seems to be more related to tenure or the attraction for doctoral topics, than a genuine need. It really is about time we took stock of the situation. For more than three decades we have seen an increasing stream of research that has targeted our use of technology in schools. What purpose has much of it served, other than to often significantly distract educators from continuing to develop innovative practice, and seek new ways to enga

How can we support innovative teachers taking risks, if every move is covered by a researcher measuring outcomes?

Why don't we start by working on the culture of our schools, and encourage those that are seeking to create a culture of innovation. Why don't we start thinking carefully about what it really means to support risk-taking in our schools; it seems the only risks people are interested in are about the evils of the net and beyond...how about we support our educational leaders who are creating new agendas for learning within their schools and seeking to genuinely leverage technology within an immersive environment to truly create worthwhile, authentic learning opportunities.

Observers say that Albemarle County stands out as a district that thrives on change and innovation, with a willingness to challenge the status quo to build a new type of learning environment for students.

In most school districts around the country, they say, innovation is happening at a painfully slow pace and often only in pockets such as individual classrooms, rarely if ever making the jump to a real, systemwide shift.

Those factors include strong leadership, empowered teachers and students, an infusion of technology districtwide, the creation of an organization with continuous learning at its core, and the freedom to experiment.

Ask naïve questions, invert perceptions, combine incompatible ideas, remix metaphors and pursue paradox. 

yet I think that if you take these as a point of departure, as I sometimes do, you'll find that you get outside of yourself in terms of your routines, your education and your common sense.  And you start to look at the world in different ways that may lead you to ideas that you never knew that you had. 

True innovative thinkers will land upon a project and see it to it’s completion. They may have dozens of ideas in their head or paper, but there are single-minded about one or two specific projects.

that they never give up. Even when they’ve failed or fallen to their lost point, they get back up and try again.

knew that our buildings needed to move towards places where students learned to experiment and imagine INSTEAD of remaining places where students spend their days listening and memorizing.

Go and ask any high schooler taking AP classes how much "designing and creating" they do before their final exams.  Chances are, you'll hear a WHOLE lot more about the "memorizing and cramming."

If you REALLY want risk-taking teachers who spend their days showing kids how to design and create, then start DEMANDING that your elected officials -- who are the real power players in conversations about what's happening in our classrooms -- rethink what we're holding schools accountable for. 

One outcome of inviting these innovative, accessible, and transformational technologies into our schools will be the removal of some of those hindrances that are blocking prized paths. If we can facilitate meaningful active learning experiences that demonstrate academic gain, this may lead to restructuring the framework, both physically and philosophically, of our schools.

1) focus on project based learning 2) focus on play 3) focus on student-centric learning & passion (applied in both kindergarden and graduate school) 4) focus on practical problem solving 5) focus on the spirit of kindergarden 6) some outside the classroom learning 7) support activities & support structures for facilitating student passions 8] Everyone likes the physical world & experience (not just kids) 9) Can do media & virtual words too, in conjunction with physical world (particularly for modeling of complex systems) 10) Challenge to integrate individual/personal passion into group projects & collaboration (connect similar interests or complementary skills in an “organic way”) 11) There is a distinction between emergent collaboration and the order of “you 3 work together” 12) Scratch can change education–mirroring the use of Logo before it. Also, scratch mirrors snapping Legos together to create “media rich projects and share in an online community” Its programming for novices. Its accessible & tinkerable. Its about meaningful projects (not just generating list of prime #s). Resnick also points to the interesting program of Alice at Carnegie Mellon which is 3-D, but it unfortunately isn’t as meaningful & personal & social as Scratch. They’ve had 1 million projects in 3 years from kids around the world

 Promotion and modelling of risk-taking.

It is not only that our leaders have jumped in and shared their learning, but they have flattened the organization and learned from others as well.  I will see many of our superintendents attend events such as “Innovation Week” to see what is happening in our schools, so that they can either share their learning with others, or act as connectors.  It would be easy to “lead from above”, but it is more important to get involved and “lead by example”.  This is something I have seen often from our administrators at every level.

Collaboration is talked a lot about in schools as an “essential trait”, but there are many people that thrive off the notion of competition.  To me, it is not one or the other, but a combination of both that really push our organization forward.  “Competitive-Collaboration” is something that I believe will really push us to the next level.