Innovation Cards - Gaining Course Team Engagement
•
0 likes•124 views
These workshop cards are designed for educational and academic developers. They use Roger's" Diffusion of Innovation" framework. The five key ideas of Relative Advantage, Compatibility, Complexity, Trialability, and Observability are presented on the fronts. On the reverse of each card, ideas and questions to think about are presented to stimulate CPD workshop design thinking.
Recommended
Recommended
More Related Content
More from Andrew Middleton
More from Andrew Middleton (20)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
Innovation Cards - Gaining Course Team Engagement
- 1. Relative advantage What • An individual's perception that the innovation will be better when compared with existing or other ideas, products or practices. Rationale • Innovations perceived to be better will be adopted more readily. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5th edition. New York: Free Press cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017
- 2. Compatibility What • The perception that an innovation is similar and congruent with existing understandings, ideas, products, or practices. Rationale • Innovations that fit into an individual's existing conception or schema will be more easily adopted. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5th edition. New York: Free Press cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017
- 3. Relative advantage Think about: • The relative benefits of the approach to: • the course - formal and informal engagement, belonging, identity, becoming • the teaching team - consistency and alignment of approaches and methods • the students - satisfaction of teaching on their course • the quality of student learning - student motivation and the development of their expectations and aspirations
- 4. Compatibility Think about: • Examples of what the team already do and how well this is shared and valued across all team members; • The signature context - what is it about the course, the subject and the discipline that matters and can inform the learning environment; • To what extent will change require a single paradigm shift in practice? • How the intrinsic motivation of individuals can be developed; • How well each person in the team understands the difference between content, learning outcomes, activities, and the role and nature of assessment and feedback; • The team's understanding of what information and knowledge mean and how this relates to the course and module learning outcomes; • How the team members understand the idea of situated learning, i.e. that the active learning environment can be manipulated by them to enhance learner motivation and deeper engagement.
- 5. Complexity What • The perceived difficulty of the innovation. Rationale • An innovation will not be readily adopted if it is found to be too complex. • Conversely, if an innovation is perceived to be easy to use, it is more likely to be adopted. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5th edition. New York: Free Press cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017
- 6. Trialability What • An individual's access to an innovation for experimentation before 'adoption' and their commitment to applying it fully. Rationale • Academic confidence comes from practice. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5th edition. New York: Free Press cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017
- 7. ComplexityThink about: • Can complexity be managed - how? • Is there an engagement 'hook'? - a single reason that everyone can buy-into? e.g. course reputation, etc; • Reducing anxiety; • Moderating 'laggard' influence - laggards are those who may have strong reasons for not engaging and who steer the group to inevitable failure; • Moderating 'innovator' influence - it may seem that innovators say 'yes' to anything and are uncritical. This is probably not true, but it is the perception of others that counts. They can leave others behind and can inadvertently disengage others; • Assumptions and expectations - how can these be challenged or developed? • Making things simple enough, but not too simple; • An incremental development strategy that might include delivered workshops, peer review and development, independent study, a role for innovators, etc.
- 8. Trialability Think about: • Is piloting feasible? To what extent? How? • How can the team discover and believe in the benefits of the new paradigm in terms of their own context? • How can the team come to quickly believe that they are capable of using the new pedagogic paradigm? • How can the team members learn to 'sing from the same song sheet' as they adopt the new paradigm across their modules and develop their student's buy-in and interest? • How can the course team confidently bring their own teaching identity to the new paradigm without breaking rank? • Can a sandbox be created to explore and develop skills and confidence in the teaching team? • To what extent is the new paradigm communicated as being technologically or spatially dependent?
- 9. Observability What • How available and visible an innovation is to an individual. Rationale • If an 'influential other' owns an innovation, the observer is more likely to adopt it as well. • Observability leads to a (threshold) tipping point where the innovation becomes so desirable to the culture, even those that are not normal innovators and early adopters (i.e. 'the late adopters') will consider adoption desirable. Rogers, E. (2003). Diffusion of innovations, 5th edition. New York: Free Press cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017
- 10. Left blank intentionally for printing purposes To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017
- 11. Observability Think about: • To what extent can this be adopted and modelled incrementally? • How critical is Peer Observation of Teaching or a culture of peer supported review to success? • Who are the 'influential others'? Are they a red herring? Should you start with the more experienced teachers or the less experienced teachers or is this an 'all or nothing' change? • What can we learn about 'desirability' e.g. in the way technology has been used to engage academics in innovation?
Editor's Notes
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017 Relative Advantage Front of the card What An individual's perception that the innovation will be better when compared with existing or other ideas, products or practices. Rationale Innovations perceived to be better will be adopted more readily. Reverse of the card Think about: The relative benefits of the approach to: the course - formal and informal engagement, belonging, identity, becoming the teaching team - consistency and alignment of approaches and methods the students - satisfaction of teaching on their course the quality of student learning - student motivation and the development of their expectations and aspirations
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017 Compatibility Front of the card What The perception that an innovation is similar and congruent with existing understandings, ideas, products, or practices. Rationale Innovations that fit into an individual's existing conception or schema will be more easily adopted. Reverse of the card Think about: * Examples of what the team already do and how well this is shared and valued across all team members * The signature context - what is it about the course, the subject and the discipline that matter and can inform the learning environment * To what extent will change require a single paradigm shift in practice? * How the intrinsic motivation of individuals can be developed * How well each personal in the team understands the difference between content, learning outcomes, activities and the role and nature of assessment and feedback * The team's understanding of what information and knowledge mean and how this relates to the course and module learning outcomes * How the team understand the idea of situated learning, i.e. that the active learning environment can be manipulated by them to enhance learner motivation and deeper engagement
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017 Compatibility Front of the card What The perception that an innovation is similar and congruent with existing understandings, ideas, products, or practices. Rationale Innovations that fit into an individual's existing conception or schema will be more easily adopted. Reverse of the card Think about: * Examples of what the team already do and how well this is shared and valued across all team members * The signature context - what is it about the course, the subject and the discipline that matter and can inform the learning environment * To what extent will change require a single paradigm shift in practice? * How the intrinsic motivation of individuals can be developed * How well each personal in the team understands the difference between content, learning outcomes, activities and the role and nature of assessment and feedback * The team's understanding of what information and knowledge mean and how this relates to the course and module learning outcomes * How the team understand the idea of situated learning, i.e. that the active learning environment can be manipulated by them to enhance learner motivation and deeper engagement
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017 Complexity Front of the card What The perceived difficulty of the innovation. Rationale An innovation will not be readily adopted if it is found to be too complex. Conversely, if an innovation is perceived to be easy to use, it is more likely to be adopted. Reverse of the card Think about: * Can complexity be managed - how? * Is there an engagement 'hook'? - a single reason that everyone can buy-into? e.g. course reputation, etc * Reducing anxiety * Moderating 'laggard' influence - laggards are those who may have strong reasons for not engaging and who steer the group to inevitable failure * Moderating 'innovator' influence - it may seem that innovators say yes to anything (and are uncritical (This is probably not true, but it is the perception of others that counts. They can leave others behind and can inadvertently disengage others. * Assumptions and expectations - how can these be challenged or developed? * Making things simple enough, but not too simple * An incremental development strategy that might include delivered workshops, peer review and development, independent study, a role for innovators, etc
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017 Triability Front of the card What An individual's access to an innovation for experimentation before 'adoption' and their commitment to applying it fully. Rationale Academic confidence comes from practice. Reverse of the card Think about: * Is piloting feasible? To what extent? How? How can the team discover and believe in the benefits of the new paradigm in terms of their own context? * How can the team come to quickly believe that they are capable of using the new pedagogic paradigm? * How can the team members learn to 'sing from the same song sheet' as they adopt the new paradigm across their modules and develop their student's buy-in and interest? * How can the course team confidently bring their own teaching identity to the new paradigm without breaking rank? * Can a sandbox be created to explore and develop skills and confidence in the teaching team? * To what extent is the new paradigm communicated as being technologically or spatially dependent?
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017 Complexity Front of the card What The perceived difficulty of the innovation. Rationale An innovation will not be readily adopted if it is found to be too complex. Conversely, if an innovation is perceived to be easy to use, it is more likely to be adopted. Reverse of the card Think about: * Can complexity be managed - how? * Is there an engagement 'hook'? - a single reason that everyone can buy-into? e.g. course reputation, etc * Reducing anxiety * Moderating 'laggard' influence - laggards are those who may have strong reasons for not engaging and who steer the group to inevitable failure * Moderating 'innovator' influence - it may seem that innovators say yes to anything (and are uncritical (This is probably not true, but it is the perception of others that counts. They can leave others behind and can inadvertently disengage others. * Assumptions and expectations - how can these be challenged or developed? * Making things simple enough, but not too simple * An incremental development strategy that might include delivered workshops, peer review and development, independent study, a role for innovators, etc
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017 Triability Front of the card What An individual's access to an innovation for experimentation before 'adoption' and their commitment to applying it fully. Rationale Academic confidence comes from practice. Reverse of the card Think about: * Is piloting feasible? To what extent? How? How can the team discover and believe in the benefits of the new paradigm in terms of their own context? * How can the team come to quickly believe that they are capable of using the new pedagogic paradigm? * How can the team members learn to 'sing from the same song sheet' as they adopt the new paradigm across their modules and develop their student's buy-in and interest? * How can the course team confidently bring their own teaching identity to the new paradigm without breaking rank? * Can a sandbox be created to explore and develop skills and confidence in the teaching team? * To what extent is the new paradigm communicated as being technologically or spatially dependent?
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017 Observability Front of the card What How available and visible an innovation is to an individual. Rationale If an influential other owns an innovation, the observer is more likely to adopt it as well. Observability leads to a (threshold) tipping point where the innovation becomes so desirable to the culture, even those that are not normal innovators and early adopters (i.e. 'the late adopters') will consider adoption desirable. Reverse of the card Think about: * To what extent can this be adopted and modelled incrementally? * How critical is Peer Observation of Teaching or a culture of peer supported review to success? * Who are the 'influential others'? Are they a red herring? Should you start with the more experienced teachers or the less experienced teachers or is this an 'all or nothing' change? * What can we learn about 'desirability' e.g. in the way technology has been used to engage academics in innovation?
- cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017
- To use these cards, print them 2 up and back to back. The laminate and cut them to postcard size. Cards produced by Andrew Middleton & Helen Kay, Sheffield Hallam University 2017 Observability Front of the card What How available and visible an innovation is to an individual. Rationale If an influential other owns an innovation, the observer is more likely to adopt it as well. Observability leads to a (threshold) tipping point where the innovation becomes so desirable to the culture, even those that are not normal innovators and early adopters (i.e. 'the late adopters') will consider adoption desirable. Reverse of the card Think about: * To what extent can this be adopted and modelled incrementally? * How critical is Peer Observation of Teaching or a culture of peer supported review to success? * Who are the 'influential others'? Are they a red herring? Should you start with the more experienced teachers or the less experienced teachers or is this an 'all or nothing' change? * What can we learn about 'desirability' e.g. in the way technology has been used to engage academics in innovation?