Francesco Pisanu is a research fellow in educational research at IPRASE (Provincial Institute of Educational Research and Experimentation ), in the Province of Trento, Italy. He studies, among other topics, psychosocial aspect related to the use of technology in education and training, special educational needs and inclusion, innovation in teaching practices and organizational issues in educational context. He has always been interested in research methodology, mostly in computer mediated environments. He has studied (work and organizational) Psychology and he got a Ph.D. in Information Systems and Organization at the University of Trento. He taught Social Psychology of groups and he is currently teaching Educational and Guidance Psychology at the Faculty of Cognitive Sciences, University of Trento. Abstract of presentation: Educational innovation and technology: a need for integration The presence of technology in learning environments (school, university, vocational education and training, professional development, etc.) does not necessarily entail a direct change in pedagogical vision or teaching practices. The mere placing of computers, video projectors and IWBs in classrooms does not mark the ultimate attainment of a teaching innovation. For this reason, I believe it is important to discuss the concept of technology-based pedagogical innovation, connect this concept to a learning theory, clarify the role of technology as far as teachers and learning results are concerned and, thus, reflect on the different levels of analyses in the study of the relationship between technologies and development of competences, digital competences included.

1. Before to start …

2. Prague, Czech Republic 24.-25.6.2013
8th international conference DisCo 2013: New
technologies and media literacy education
Educational innovation and technology: a
need for integration
Francesco Pisanu
IPRASE &
Trento University, Department of Psychology and Cognitive Sciences
Maurizio Gentile
IPRASE & LUMSA Rome

3. Where I live
and work

4. EDUCATION in Trentino: statistical data
Pupils: 83.523
nursery school: 17.094
lower (: first) school: 26.363
middle school: 15.492
upper school: 20.458
vocational school: 4.116
Teachers: 8.300 ~
Students Univ. of Trento: 15.530
F 7.933 / M 7.597; 8.553 from the province, 323 from
foreign countries, 6654 from other Italian regions.

5. EDUCATION in Trentino: statistical data
Schools in the province
nursery school: 287
lower (: first) school: 240
middle school: 84
upper school: 34
Vocational schools:
Upper Secondary schools
Public: 24 (TVET: 16)
Private: 10 (TVET: 3)
VET centres
Public: 2
Private: 20

6. The AUTONOMY
of the Province of Trento
Italy's Constitution and a special statute from the
year 1972 (together with following supplements
and amendments) awards the province Trento a
particular autonomy (with legislative and
administrative powers)

7. Technology use in education in Trentino
RADIO TV INTERNET
MUSIC
INSTRUCTIONAL
STUFF

8. Interactive Whiteboards in Trentino

9. Interactive Whiteboard in Trentino: who use it in classroom
Interactive Whiteboard in Trentino: for what

10. Why this presentation?
This paper aims to discuss why and how teaching
practices and technologies need to be integrated,
at all levels, to improve learners meaningful
learning.
A first attempt to define pedagogical innovation is
presented, with a reference to Creative Class
Room framework (CCR).
From this point of view, pedagogical innovation,
considering technological and digital based
learning environment, is a matter of integration
among different levels of analysis.

11. 1. Introduction
The presence of technology in learning
environments (school, university, professional
training, etc.) does not necessarily entail a
direct change in pedagogical vision or
teaching practices.
It is important:
to discuss the concept of technology-based pedagogical
innovation,
connect this concept to a learning theory,
clarify the role of technology,
reflect on the different levels of analyses involved.

12. Assessing technologies’ effects
M. Fullan
A. Calvani
J.C. Hattie
Learners’
role
Technologies
Methodologie
Measured
effects

13. 2. Pedagogical vs technological innovation?
Following the European project Creative
Classroom (Bocconi, Kampylis and Punie, 2012),
we can define pedagogical innovation as that set
of products, processes, strategies and
approaches which significantly improve the state
of affairs, becoming reference points
According to the Centre for Educational Research
and Innovation (OECD/CERI, 2009), promoting
innovation in the learning environment is not at all
easy and requires great commitment, the ability to
manage multiple resistances and it frequently
translates into slow rates of change.

14. 2. Pedagogical vs technological innovation?
Fullan (2011) argues that, although in some
countries laptops and video projectors are
replacing traditional technologies, the majority of
students continue to experience their role as
«consumers of information» rather than problem
resolvers, producers of information and
innovators.
Innovating learning processes is opposed to the
use of technologies to replicate traditional
teaching practices. It can be extended to formal
and informal learning environments, training
adults, at school and at university (CCR, 2012).

15. How people learn?
How People Learn (Donovan, Bransford, 2005)
approach, recently referred to in the project
Digital Learning Classroom (Lopez, 2010). The
approach puts forward five general principles:
1. learners learn better when knowledge merges
with and/or develops from what they already
know;
2. learners learn better when they work with
others in learning, they ask questions and they
reflect on what they have learnt and how it was
learnt;

16. How people learn?
How People Learn (Donovan, Bransford, 2005)
approach, recently referred to in the project
Digital Learning Classroom (Lopez, 2010). The
approach puts forward five general principles:
3. learners learn better when the information offered and
the context are tailored to the cognitive needs of them;
4. learners learn better if what they learn is fundamental
and in-depth and if the individual competences/abilities
are strongly anchored to a principle/general concept,
and if what they have studied has multiple applications;
5. learners learn better when they are given feedback
and/or are given the opportunity to evaluate their own
learning.

17. 3. The IWB example …

18. 3. The IWB example …
IWBs can be an important resource for involving
pupils during lessons. However, problems of a
varying nature do materialize around them:
an increase in the centrality of the teacher and a
reduction in collaborative interaction amongst
students (Latane, 2002; Jones, Tanner, 2002; Maor,
2003);
minor quality of cognitive interaction between
teachers and pupils (Smith, Hardman and Higgins,
2006).
If used as static technology, the IWB does not
produce any appreciable changes in teaching
practices (Beauchamp, 2004; Glover, Miller, 2009).

19. 4. Technologies, computers and learning
Hattie (2009), when revising the meta-analyses
regarding different types of technologies use
found effects which varied from 0.09 of standard
deviation for distance learning up to a maximum
of 0.52 associated with learning methods based on
interactive videos.
In more specific terms the meta-analyses show
that computers are used effectively:

20. 4. Technologies, computers and learning
Technology works
a. As part of teaching
strategies
b. When there is a prior
training
c. With multiple learning
opportunities
d. When student controls
them
e. With peer-learning
f. With teacher’s feedback
Source: Hattie, J.A.C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses
relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.

21. Source: Hattie, J.A.C. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses
relating to achievement. New York, NY: Routledge.
Technology ES
Interactive video methods 0,52
Simulations 0,33
Computer-assisted instruction 0,32
Programmed instruction 0,24
Audio-visual methods 0,22
Web-based learning 0,18
Distance education 0,09
1
2
3
4
5
6
7

22. 4. Technologies, computers and learning
With particular conditions of use, technologies
can influence the teaching/learning process,
above all when they are centered on the students.
Unfortunately it is just as clear that the impacts of
technologies on learning outcomes have provided
contrasting results.
In our opinion the levels to consider should
include the following:
school level;
technological level;
teachers level;
Students level.

23. 5. A Possible way of integration: the creative
classroom framework
Insights are from a European research project, carried
out by EC JRC-IPTS from December 2011 to June
2013, on “Up-scaling Creative Classrooms in Europe”
(SCALE CCR).
Aim of the study is to provide a better understanding of
ICT-enabled innovation for learning and to identify
policy recommendations for the further mainstreaming
of ICT in Education and Training (E&T) in Europe.
In addition to desk research, a number of existing
cases have been analyzed which provide insights on
major enablers and barriers of CCR implementation in
real contexts.

24. Creative Class Rooms extended framework (Bocconi et al., 2012).

25. 5. A Possible way of integration: the creative
classroom framework
Main project results highlight the multi-dimensional
and holistic nature of the Creative Classrooms as
innovative learning environments that fully embed the
potentials of ICT for learning.
The model consists of eight encompassing and
interconnected dimensions that capture the essential
nature of these learning ecosystems: Content and
Curricula, Assessment, Learning Practices, Teaching
Practices, Organization, Leadership and Values,
Connectedness, and Infrastructure.

26. 5. A Possible way of integration: the creative
Learning Solution Approach

27. 5. What kind of innovation with LSA?
Incremental innovation
Integration
between old and
new technologies
Flexible use of
space and
learning
environment
Adapting
activities to
available
softwares
Basic
cooperative
learning
structures

28. 5. LSA vs CCR

29. 6. Conclusions
In the history of technology there is a reoccurring
tendency to focus one’s attention on the technical
innovations of the new tools, to the detriment of
pedagogical reflection and evaluation of sustainability.
it is difficult to offer teachers guidance on how to use
them without a clear understanding of how pupils learn
(Howland et. al., 2012).
The LSA approach could be an attempt to support a
integrated pedagogical ICT-based innovation starting
from and incremental, rather than radical innovation
point of view (Cooper, 1998).

30. 6. Conclusions
I believe that innovative project based on LSA might
get the level of educational innovation, both at local
and national level if it will help to develop a key focus
on the following points.
First, design and implementation of classroom-based
solutions, which help teachers to integrate technology
in subject-matter teaching and learning.
Second, encourage a open use of hardware and
software devices; provide pupils with lots of
opportunities for learning.
Last but not the least, ensure a consistent support to
teachers during the instructional work.

31. Back to Scientific American:
For 3,4 millions of years no evident
signs of innovation in human
beings’ behavior.
In Europe, innovation turning point
40,000 years ago.
Creativity and innovation are not
only “brain-size” related but also
social group size and group
connectiveness related.
The cultural “ratchet effect” applied
on creativity and innovation.

32. Francesco Pisanu
francesco.pisanu@iprase.tn.it
Website: www.iprase.tn.it