Laszlo Horvath – horvath.laszlo@ppk.elte.hu Orsolya Kalman – kalman.orsolya@ppk.elte.hu

1. Innovativeways of supporting and developingteaching and learning in Hungarianhighereducation LaszloHorvath – horvath.laszlo@ppk.elte.hu Orsolya Kalman – kalman.orsolya@ppk.elte.hu ELTE Eötvös Loránd University Institute of Education, Hungary This presentation is based on the outcomes of the research projects entitled „The emergence and diffusion of local innovations and their systemic impact in the education sector” (No. 115857)

2. (Godin, 2008) Xenophon (5th century BC): kainotomia opening of newmines (+)  changeas a negative, distruptiveforce (eg. Galilei) Sociology – socialchange Economics – technologicalchange Antrophology – culturalchange „conscious decision, criteria of commercialization” „adopterinterprets it asnew…” „Qualitativelydifferentfromexistingthings…”

3. Dominance of theindustry-paradigm: • Dominance of technology and production • Criteriaforsuccess and commercialization • Oslo Manual: • Product • Process • Organizational • Marketing (OECD, 2005) PRODUCT SERVICE • Tangible • Storable • Broadneeds • Human-machinesystem • Predeterminedprocess • Follow-upfeedback • Intangible • Unstorable • Local needs • Human-human system • Processcanchange • Immediatefeedback Service-basedinnovations  public sector innovation  educationalinnovation (Barcet, 2010)

4. Research questions and empiricalsources Research questions: • What kinds of innovation activities can be identified in Hungarian HEIs? • How these activities are supported? • What kinds of collaboration can enhance the innovation diffusion? Empiricalsources: • „Innova” research:focusingonemergence and diffusion of local educationinnovations in Hungary onthewholeeducational sector (fromkindergartentodoctoralschools) – Sample: 4853 heads of educationalinstitutionsresponded (~30%), out of which 513 arehighereducationalorganizational unit (instituteordepartment) • „Xodcoll” research:focusingoninter-organizationalcooperation in realizinginterdisciplinaryeducationalprogrammes – Sample: 95 academicsparticipating in interdisciplinaryprogrammes

5. Innovationactivity • The 28% of respondentsindicatedthat in the last ten years it happenedquiteoftenthattheystartedtoapplysolutionsthatweresignificantlydifferentfromtheirpreviouspractice. • Public education: 27% • Highereducation: 34% • For-profit sector:38% • The 38% of respondentsthinkthat in the last ten years it happenedquiteoftenthatfollowingtheinnovationsinitiatedbyourstaff, theeffectiveness of theorganisation has improved. • Public education: 37% • Highereducation: 45% • For-profit sector:56%

6. Areas of innovation • Teachers in publiceducationalinstitutionsmostlymentioned (44%) innovationsregardingnewmethods and toolsforplanning and implementinglessons. • Academics inhighereducationaldepartmentsmostlymentioned(37%) innovationsregardingnewsolutionsforusingtechnicaltools in education. • Educators in thefor-profit sector mostlymentioned (44%, 36%) innovationsregardinginternalorganisation and external relations.

7. Out of 513 highereducationorganizational unit, 454 named a concreteinnovation contentanalysisbytwoindependentresearcher • 55,9% of respondentsstatedthattheselectedinnovationimprovedconsiderablytheeffectiveness of theorganization (0,2% reportedthat it had negativeconsequences) • Reasonsfordevelopingtheinnovation: • 76,6% attractiveprofessionalapproach • 64,7% problemsolving • 47,4% inspiration of other, similarorganizations • 43% respondingtoexternalneeds • 5% bychance OECD (2005): Oslo Manual

8. Adaption and diffusion of innovations • In publicand highereducationinstitutionsthe15%of respondentsstatedthat it happenedquite a lotthattheyborrowinnovationsfromotherorganizations. In thecase of for-profit sector this is 23%. • Regardingotherorganizationsborrowingtheirowninnovationsthe8% of publiceducationinstitutions, and 10% of highereducationinstitutionsand 12% of public-sector organizationsreportedthat it happenedquiteoften.

9. Innovationactivity in thelight of organizationallearningcapacity • Innovation Index (Horváth, 2017): • (EFA: ML/Promax; KMO=0.873; TVE=46,41%) • unidimensionality • OrganizationalLearningCapacitybasedonBess, Perkins and McCown(2010) scale: • (EFA: ML/Promax; KMO=0.918; TVE=58,63%) • Organizationalsupportforlearning • Professional reflexivity • Alignment of individual and organizationalgoals

10. Diffusion of educationalinnovationsthroughteachereducation and professionaldevelopment • Institutionscouldnameoneorganizationfromwheretheyhaveadapted an innovation • Mainly 1 or 2 memberclusters/chains • Only in thecases of largeuniversitiesprovidingteachereducationcan we seelargerclusters!

11. Interdisciplinarycooperation • Harmonizing of content and assessment • Opportunitiesforcooperation (designing newcourses) • More intensiveattheplanningphase • Knowledgesharing • Specialskills (managinginterstitiality) Independent samples t-test t(50,636)=-2.211; p=0.032 Hedges’ g = 0.580

12. Casestudyexample: Forest-pedagogicscourse in teachereducation • Evolution: electivecourse 3 course modul in teachereducation and CPD • Role of innovationchampions, internal and externalpartners • Interaction in development and diffusion (more users, more sophisticated programme) • Time: childparticipantsarenowgraduatedteachers, disseminatingthe programme

13. Conclusions • Innovationas a product and a process – complexity • Dominance of product and processinnovations in HE  mainlyprofessionalconsiderationsregardinginnovationactivity • Diffusion is internallyfocused  more emphasisoninter-institutionalcooperation and learning • Supportingevidenceforinter-institutionalcooperationregardingworkplacelearning of academics

14. Thankyouforyourattention! LaszloHorvath – horvath.laszlo@ppk.elte.hu Orsolya Kalman – kalman.orsolya@ppk.elte.hu ELTE Eötvös Loránd University Institute of Education, Hungary SUPPORTED BY THE HUNGARIAN SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH FUND (115857) SUPPORTED BY THE ÚNKP-17-3 NEW NATIONAL EXCELLENCE PROGRAM OF THE MINISTRY OF HUMAN CAPACITIES