Discovering Vision

Theoretical foundations

and practical solutions

in the field of creative learning

Creative learning and networking for European Innovation

A project funded by the Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (EACEA) of the European Commission

Project number143725-LLP-1-2008-1-ES-KA1-KA1SCR

The University of the Basque Country (coordinator)

The University of EdinburghEducode

Haaga-Helia University of Applied SciencesTallinn University

Universal Learning Systems

Litekeenaren bila

Kohti uusia näkemyksiä

Sviluppare nuovi orizzonti

Descubriendo horizontes

Visionen entdecken

1

Lead partners.

Management: Jesús Ibáñez

Scientific team: Dr Idoia Fernández; Dr Maite Arandia; Dr Ana Eizagirre; Dr Marta

Barandiaran; Izaskun Etxebarria; Dr Pilar Ruiz de Gauna; Dr Esther Torres; Ainhoa Ezeiza;

Nerea Agirre.

The University of the Basque Country

Involved partners.

Stephen Farrier; Dr John Davis; Dr Pat Gannon-Leary. The University of Edinburgh,

Scotland.

Dr Krista Loogma; Meril Ümarik. Tallin University, Estonia.

Heidi-Maria Listo. Educode, Finland.

Kitte Marttinen. Haaga Helia University of Applied Sciences, Finland.

Dr Alan Bruce. Universal Learning Systems, Ireland.

Identifying Best Practices.

Stephen Farrier; Dr John Davis; Dr Pat Gannon-Leary. The University of Edinburgh,

Scotland.

Dr Krista Loogma; Meril Ümarik. Tallin University, Estonia.

Heidi-Maria Listo. Educode, Finland.

Kitte Marttinen. Haaga Helia University of Applied Sciences, Finland.

Dr Alan Bruce. Universal Learning Systems, Ireland.

Jose Luis Fernández Maure; Iñaki Mujika; Ramón Martínez de Murgia, Tknika, Basque

Country.

Mauro Chiarel, Hannes Haller. Tangram SRL, Italy.

© CREANOVA projectThis project has been funded with support from the European Commission. This publication reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained there in.

2

INTRODUCTION

The main aim of the LLP Transversal Research Creanova Project is the

production of theoretical and practical knowledge on creativity and

innovation in the learning process - as well as identification of concepts,

methods and best practices that demonstrate and reflect innovative

learning. This report presents the findings of the first part of that process. It

examines the theoretical and research background to innovation and

creativity in learning. It examines the foundations of human creativity in

relation to cognition, articulation and transfer of learning concepts and

methods. It surveys the literature and academic research in regard to

conditions for innovation and creative learning while pacing hem in the

context of the profound systemic changes caused by process of socio-

economic transformation and globalization.

The Report was compiled by transnational academic, research and training

partners under the coordination of the University of the Basque Country

between December 2008 and October 2009.

The two key objectives have been:

• To build a theoretical framework that defines concepts of creativity,

innovation and learning (and their inter-relationship in current global

contexts)

• To identify key teaching-learning practices in selected countries that

underpin the development of creative and innovative skills in the

areas of Vocational Education and Training, Adult Education and

technical and creative industries.

This process has been enriched by the diversity of participating partners -

universities, adult education providers, private research agencies and public

statutory organizations. Working across eight countries, seven languages

3

and varying cultural and economic contexts has been a source of rich

learning for the whole team.

The document has three central elements. The first is to meet the

requirement to write a comprehensive paper that addresses the key aspects

under review. The theoretical approach encompasses contributions from

different disciplines (pedagogy, psychology, sociology and economics), in an

engaged social analysis of the world we inhabit. The hypothesis is that

creativity and innovation as part of learning do not arise in a vacuum, but

find their raison d 'etre and development in social, economic, political and

ideological contexts. The analytical focus moves from broader contexts to

more particular ones (group or individual) and then engages with the

educational world of education and formal learning.

The second part presents the tool designed for identification of best

practices in each of the countries concerned, as well as documented

practices. The tool is a questionnaire aimed to get documented descriptions

of selected practices in VET areas, technical and creative industries and to

facilitate comparative analysis. This aims to collect data and evidence on

successful practices that may be transferred to other contexts. This

preliminary analysis has shown certain trends in best practices and

contrasted them with prevailing ideas.

The study and discussion enabled an interpretative model based on four

key-factors: need, freedom, interaction and environment. These

encapsulate the meanings and elements present in the overall project.

The third part is a creative synthesis of the foregoing, and not its mere

summary. It reflects the key concepts with learning design specialists can

operate when approaching the dynamics and requirements of sustainable

innovation and creativity to meet the learning needs and challenges of our

times.

4

PART 1.

Theoretical Approach.Theoretical interpretation.

Conclusion.

Bibliographic references.

5

6

PART I. THEORETICAL APPROACH

I. LEARNING AS THE CORE OF THE KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY

1.1. From industrial societies to knowledge societies: key changes.1.2. Understanding learning in the knowledge society1.3. Learning as the Collaborative, Co-construction of knowledge

II. CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION: CONCEPTUAL CONVERGENCE

2.1. Creativity as an object of scientific study: genesis and development.2.2. Innovation as an object of scientific study: genesis and development.

III. CREATIVE AND INNOVATIVE LEARNING IN THE WORLD OF WORK AND EDUCATION

3.1. Society, learning and work3.2. New learning environments: networking and community based learning.3.3. Towards new forms of professionalism.

IV. DEVELOPING CREATIVE COMPETENCE AND INNOVATION

4.1 Methodology, processes and conditions that promote the development of creative competences that give rise to innovation

7

8

9

I. LEARNING AS THE CORE OF THE

KNOWLEDGE SOCIETY

1.1. From industrial societies to knowledge societies: key changes.

A key issue in the preparation of students for the challenges of life and the

globalized The motivation for the Creanova project is the study of how

learning situations and processes are constructed to achieve sustainable

innovation. The main aim is linking creativity with capabilities to innovate

in the design and preparation of new processes, products or ideas. This is

also directly linked to entrepreneurship and innovative adaptation skills of

learners. Innovation is one of the four pillars of the Lisbon Agenda. Yet

there exists little evidence on what innovation is - and even less on how it

can be identified, fostered and developed in practical ways (particularly in

contexts of profound structural change).

Research on creative learning and innovation is critical for enhanced

European competitiveness in globalized contexts. Innovation includes

learning methodologies, practices, systems and applications. This includes a

focus on how such innovative practice can be rolled out to improve creative

competencies of learners and students in vocational, and adult education

and work-based environments.

The issue is also a priority for many policy makers in Europe. Due to the

recent advances in both the Bologna and Copenhagen processes, we are

facing a profound reform of the curricula on both vocational and higher

education levels. Development of research findings and a network of

competent institutions with experience in applying innovative methodologies

to promote creative competencies in vocational and adult education is a

valuable resource for relevant professionals and training institutions.

Furthermore, the application of these results to adult education should also

be straight forward, at least to specific target groups of training subjects.

10

Often, when starting to analyze society, one of the first concepts is that of

globalization of economic and financial systems. However, a more historical

and socio-cultural approach (such as those found in education and training)

suggests contemporary society is experiencing spectacular changes in the

social organization of knowledge production, use and distribution.

The term ‘social organization of knowledge’ refers to the structures, rules

and values adopted by human groups to create, store and convey those

ideas, In European history, the invention of the printing press (adapted

from Chinese precedents) represented the opening of a period in which

large-scale print dissemination mediated between people and culture,

producing hitherto unknown or unused applications of reading and writing

skills (Eisenstein, 1979). Protestant emphases on popular access to

personal Bible reading (and interpretation of this reading) in vernacular

languages marked not only a shift from Latin as the language of scholarship

but also the beginning of reading practices/uses that accelerated the

development of the printing industry. The linearity and recurrence of the

written word underpinned the emergence of associations, schools,

illustration techniques, scientific method and the very organization of

written, legal registration of capitalist industrial companies (Graff, 1979;

Goody, 1990).

Knowledge thus itself became a message - to be repeated and conveyed to

far greater numbers of people. The process of conveying knowledge and

information depended increasingly on more books being printed and the

assumption that recipients were able to read. People with access to

standard writing systems had the possibility not only to use but also

produce knowledge. They also had competitive advantage. However,

admission to knowledge production levels was restricted. Different

normative and institutional strategies were historically organized to select

those perceived as capable of producing innovative breakthroughs - as

validated by accepted scientific communities. This entailed therefore

hierarchic, controlled and mediated knowledge ownership and transmission

systems.

11

Formal education systems transmitted and propagated accepted scientific

doctrine - knowledge produced by means of curricula that selected the ideas

and skills that learners or required for subsequent application to their trades

or professions. Education placed emphasis on teaching and instruction. The

professor or teacher played a major part in this framework, given that these

were the people who taught those that did not know. This was a banking

conception of education in which the student was an empty container that

had to be filled with content, opposed to a candle to be lit (Freire, 1970).

On the whole, traditional learning systems in the Western World were

modeled around the idea of differential access to learning and knowledge,

thus reflecting existing differences in stratified class systems. Classrooms

were structured in strictly didactic ways in terms of pedagogy. In addition,

classrooms were located in fixed places - the architecture itself reflecting

notions of hierarchy, order and control (Bruce, 2009).

Parallel to school divisions and stratification were similar systems in the

world of work to which schooling structures were linked more and more

explicitly during the age of industrialization (Braverman, 1974). Hierarchies

of knowledge transfer are seen in the division of work. This hierarchy can be

conceptualized as a type of pyramid. At the peak of the pyramid is the

owner-stakeholder (or entrepreneur, engineer or designer) who originates

an idea or technique that can then be implemented by taking advantage of

economies of scale (Miller et al, 2008). The concept of the independent

‘genius’ who creates new ideas or techniques and the technocrat who

ensures they are implemented by ‘front-line’ workers maintains, legitimates

and reproduces an inherently unequal distribution of the capability to

produce, know, learn and derive shared benefit from the ideas/techniques.

The education and training of workers, given their subsidiary function, only

develops to the most basic level required to satisfy production needs.

Veblen powerfully conceptualized the impact of fragmented knowledge and

skill acquisition for craft workmanship resulting from industrialization as

long ago as 1914 (Veblen, 2006).

As in the case of the printing press, the Internet is a contemporary

technological tool that makes possible management of information and

12

knowledge in quantities hitherto incomprehensible - and in real time. In this

respect, it permits access to seemingly limitless amounts of information.

This is subject to access and digital literacy which itself can be mediated by

pre-existing power and access structures. The Internet has a demonstrated

intentionality that continues to guide the action of its creators.

Making a retrospective, summarized interpretation we can observe that, as

Castells (2001) states:

1.The Internet is the combination of an unprecedented linked network of big science, military research and the culture of freedom (in the European liberal sense of defence of individual freedom against any kind of external limitation), born outside specific company parameters and on which scientists and researchers collaborated intensively. 2.Its creators deliberately worked on a precise computer architecture evolving towards an open, decentralised, distributed and multidirectional computer-based communication system capable of encompassing the entire world (and with an inherent sense of possibly changing it). 3. Internet genesis and development is a cultural practice regulated by the cultural values of individuals (and even hackers) who network with open, free software distribution rules. The protocols on the basis of which they work are themselves susceptible to modification. 4. Institutions managing the Internet must constitute themselves according to the principles of transparency and cooperation inherent within their stated philosophy and practice to function effectively.

This suggests cultural guidelines potentially based on cooperation,

reciprocity in knowledge distribution modalities, boundary crossing through

horizontal networking between people from different contexts or practices,

re-imagined notions of copyright and intellectual ownership rights and

community formulations such as the Linux Law: Given enough eyeballs, all

bugs are shallow (Miettinen, 2006: 177).

Perhaps the most significant impact, from the point of view of knowledge

and learning, is that development of advanced new technologies has

resulted in a massive reduction in the amount of time between learning by

using and producing by using. People learn by doing (repeatedly practising

a task with or without prior instruction) as well as by using (repeatedly

using tools/facilities without prior instruction) (Cedefop, 2008). These

13

processes lead to the production and creation of new knowledge, and hence

to its practical and innovating application. It is a sort of virtuous circle

between the diffusion of technological knowledge and its perfection

(Castells, 2001), always remaining within cultural parameters of trust,

openness and freedom.

In a graphic sense the Encyclopedia of Diderot and D’Alembert (the book of

everything that could possibly be known) has mutated to a Wikipedia in

constant growth, a collective endeavour to improve knowledge (Taddei,

2009) in which millions of people learn but also themselves participate.

Knowledge and learning constitute the two faces of one same coin: they represent the process of societal ascent from the ‘primitive’ forms of industry and information - predominantly economic-driven - to the more ‘advanced’ forms of community and freedom determined by cultural achievement. Technology provides the ladder to climb the value chain. (Carneiro, 2007:153).

Technological development is however never static. Recent studies are

already investigating how to project a future Europe in terms of education

and learning.

Society is no longer dominated by the industrial-era logics of mass-production and mass-consumption. Scale is no longer the guiding principle. Instead, the pivotal act, the creation of added value, has changed locations. There are hints of the potential of the present to create a society where the division between the supply side and demand side is marginal. These include tendencies towards self-generated personalization, the unique creation expressed in a widespread do-it-yourself attitude, the breakdown of the professional/amateur distinction and the emergence of web 2.0 technologies that give rise to social networking, collaborative content creation and democratized innovation. (Miller et al, 2008: vii)

Although the future is uncertain, it is open to new constructions. Carneiro

(2007:157) describes three possibilities.

• Paradigm shifts: from industry (past), to globalization (present thrust), and moving towards a New Renaissance period (utopian vision).

• Delivery modes: from uniform, rote systems (past) to segmented distribution (present market-driven trend), and gradually

14

accommodating increasing levels of personalization/customization (utopian vision).

• Driving forces: from bureaucracy-led (past preference for national or State-controlled systems) to market-led arrangements (present move), which, in turn, should give way to empowered communities (utopian vision of a radical devolution to civil society)

In this scenario, knowledge-based societies will have to overcome a number

of barriers, challenges and tensions that may prevent horizontal focus on a

common good being achieved. This shift to less hierarchical notions of

knowledge production has been underpinned by new social model thinking.

This highlights the need to understand local contradictions and promotes

the value of interaction, dialogue and reciprocity. At the centre of this shift

has been the aim to overcome borders, whether disciplinary, geographic,

institutional or cultural.

Such a shift raises questions regarding structures of learning, working and

production and how they might promote innovation and creativity. It is

necessary to consider and compare different types of organizational

structures that contribute to creativity learning and innovation. It should be

possible to identify different forms of organizational/societal structures from

evaluations of practice and to investigate how different methods for

developing innovation and creativity work in different societies, educational

systems or organizations. This also raises questions regarding the nature of

learning in knowledge-based societies. It is important to consider what

learning looks like in societies where hierarchies are modified or shaped in

more fluid ways.

15

1.2. Understanding learning in the knowledge society

Theoretical issues concerning learning include cultural history activity

theory, expansive learning and dialogic learning. This encompasses issues

such as the politics of learning, learning through social interaction, the

social context of learning and transformational learning.

There has been shift in academic writing about learning and society. Some

authors suggest an economy of learning where individual, organizational,

company, sectorial or national success precisely lies with the ability to learn.

[The government of Singapore, planning in the current economic crisis] realises that its future prosperity depends not on educating its people in the knowledge and skills for a particular kind of economy, but in developing its people’s capacity for learning and dealing with change so they can respond quickly and flexibly, adapting and retraining as future economic opportunities or recessions arise... the vision... is to become a society of thinking schools, a learning nation... the future of the nation depends on its people... and on a higher degree of creativity. (Hargreaves, 2003:31)

Learning as a concept can mean flexibility, interaction and collaborative

action. This can involve exchange within or between communities or within

disciplines, organizations, jobs or students (Carneiro, 2007). In this respect,

one of the strongest potential sources available for learning and

improvement in any area or organization lies in other people and social

capital - the forms used to share and develop knowledge with ‘others’.

(OECD, 2001)

Sharing ideas and experience, offering moral backing in the face of new and difficult challenges, discussing ideas... that is the basis of (effective) communities. (Hargreaves, 2003:129)

Socio-cultural definitions of learning can be linked to the notion of dialogic

learning within critical sociology (Beck, 1998; Beck, Giddens & Lash, 1997;

Giddens, 1995, 1998; Habermas, 1987, etc.) and critical pedagogy in

community education (Freire, 1970, 1994, 1997). The theoretical basis of

dialogic learning (Bruner, 1988, 1996, 2000; Habermas, 1987; Freire,

16

1970, 1994, 1997; Rogoff, 1993, 2001; Vygotsky, 1995, 2006; Chomsky,

1977, 2001; Aubert, Flecha et al, 2008; Sen, 1999) stresses an idea of

learning in keeping with:

• Contemporary informational society

• The dialogic about-turn experienced by societies and even

interpersonal relations (in which dialogue acquires centrality and

greater presence in all social spheres from politics to sitting rooms,

passing through work, education and intimate relations)

• Multiculturalism resulting from planetary mobility and the resulting

increased contact and interaction between vastly differing cultures.

This conception of learning is to be found in communicative and socio-

historic perspectives, thus explaining societal dynamism. Dialogue and

interaction are the dimensions sustaining the idea of learning, which are

therefore maintained by this perspective.

The observations and research on which the concept is based have demonstrated how, through a dialogue (Auber; Flecha et al, 2008: 24-34; CREA, 2003-2005;CREA, 2006-2011)

The ideas behind dialogic learning can be summarized (Aubert, Flecha, et al,

2008:93):

1. Learning comes from the interactions established through dialogue

and is therefore mediated by language. From the perspective of

different authors (Chomsky, 1977, 1988, 2000; Habermas, 1987;

Cummins, 2002), all people (independent of social, educational,

cultural or financial status) have the ability to communicate, express

feelings, arguments or ideas, and to reach agreements with ‘others’.

2. Learning depends on the social interactions between people who are

equal to yet different from one another, and the extent to which they

agree on the direction taken by these interactions (Vygotsky, 1995;

Bruner, 2000; Rogoff, 1993; Wells, 2001).

3. All kinds of learning practice make sense within a specific socio-

cultural context, within the framework of cultural practice and cultural

17

community (Rogoff, 1993) in which one actively participates.

4. All communicative processes convey meaning and intention, explicit

or not, and comprise gestural and verbal language going beyond the

spoken word (Argyle & Trower, 1979). The totality has an effect on

the type of interaction provoked and is of enormous importance to all

human actions and relations (whether work situations, friendship,

education). In this respect, contributions to the act of speaking

(Austin, 1971; Searle, 1980; Searle & Soler, 2004) lead to reflections

on the consequences of verbal and non-verbal communication on

people (looks, gestures and body language).

5. Dialogic learning has the mission of transforming situations and

relations, making it possible to achieve greater levels of social

equality. The idea of the social subject rather than the dependent

object, submissive and adapted, is developed by Paulo Freire (1970,

1994, 1997), who clearly states we are beings of transformation and

not of adaptation (Freire, 1997: 26). This expresses value and trust

in the ability of all people to think, act, rebuild and change

contradictory situations and structures inherent in educational and

social practices - always based on an egalitarian dialogue. Rather

than a conservative, transmission-response pedagogy, Freire

proposes an inquiring, knowledge-producing question pedagogy,

more keeping with contemporary needs.

There are four main aspects of dialogic learning described in the literature.

1. Using dialogue as a vehicle of exchange between people, creating and

modifying meanings according to agreement reached between all

parties involved in a working and learning space.

2. Based on trust in people and in their skill at collective creation,

generating new ideas and projecting them by means of actions in the

transformation of collective realities.

3. Incorporating the voices of all agents in professional, educational and

work contexts - a guarantee of a multidimensional and egalitarian

outlook.

18

4. Developing the idea of solidarity in everyday actions with people, as

the expression of struggle against exclusion and a contribution to

social cohesion.

Theories such as dialogic learning can be linked to more contemporary

approaches to cultural historical activity theory. This is based on the

concept of cultural mediation where the relationship between subject and

environment is mediated by signs and tools (Vygotsky, 1979 in Miettinen,

2006:175). Correspondingly, the central mechanism of learning is

‘remediation’, the finding and creation of new means. At first, this approach

seems to over-emphasise the role of the teacher. However, when allied to

notions of expansive learning, it promotes notions of the co-construction of

knowledge.

Expansive learning involves processes by which work organizations resolve

internal contradictions in order to construct qualitatively new ways of

working. It involves creation of new knowledge and new practices for an

emergent activity, learning embedded in, and constitutive of, qualitative

transformation of the entire activity system (Engeström, 2004: 4). Spinosa,

Flores and Dreyfus (1997) referred to this process as ‘reconfiguration’.

Sepúlveda (2001) clarifies the meaning of expansive learning developed by

Engeström, and its repercussions in social and educational practice. This

concept refers to the process by which people sharing a practice domain

(such as work, community, formal study) build tools. Mere relationships

evolve to ways of understanding relationships. This mode of understanding

takes shape through the effect of the activity developed by domain

inhabitants. The repertoire of their culture to act in a manner other than it

would have done if the ensemble of their cultural orders had not changed is

transformed. Expansive learning makes it possible to go beyond the

limitations people are subjected to by learned cultural understanding and to

visualise other kinds of cultural orientations of a more complex nature which

did not previously exist in their tradition and inherited cultural

understanding. This offers a framework to imagine how to learn in the face

of complex, permanently changing societies. It offers a new manner of

19

learning in situations of accelerated change, when extreme contradictions

may manifest themselves. This emphasis is connected to Bateson (1985) on

third-order learning.

Learners question the validity of tasks and problems set by context and start transforming the context itself. This kind of learning is related to innovation. At school, this kind of expansive learning could mean that pupils and teachers critically analyse the ways they study and work and start to change them. (Sepúlveda, 2001:7)

In general, the dialogic approach stresses that learning based on

relationships and fluid communication translates equally well into widely

differing educational experiences. Some students have gained enormously

from high value education in learning communities that have recently been

developed in the framework of primary, secondary and adult education

(Jaussi, 2002; Aubert, Duque et al, 2004). Other students have benefited

from dialogic approaches in fields such as lifelong training or from

developing educational communities to transform different organisations

(Fernández & Arandia, 2003; Alonso, Arandia & Loza, 2008). This raises the

question as to how and whether such methods could be utilised to promote

creativity and innovation. Similarly, learning based on relationships can be

connected to ideas of collective intelligence to develop processes of learning

that promote social inclusion.

Avis (2002) draws out connections between expansive learning, social

capital and collective intelligence. These concepts are situated within their

socio-economic context, asserting that the development of social capital will

be a vehicle for economic regeneration and competitiveness as well as a

mechanism for the generation of social inclusion and cohesion. However,

Avis sees the progressive potential of expansive learning, social capital and

expansive learning as limited within a context that accepts current capitalist

relations.

20

1.3. Learning as the Collaborative, Co-construction of knowledge.

Collaborative learning aimed at the co-construction of knowledge suggests

that learning and knowledge are linked but different. This consolidates the

idea that there may be many different ways of learning not considered by

currently constructed formal educational structures.

Learning points such as the formation of concepts, the creation of artifacts, the application of disciplinary knowledge to the solving of problems in areas of regular practices are difficult to teach by usual methods, essentially because teaching has been developed with the idea of conveying contents. (Sepúlveda, 2001:4)

Both extensive learning (Engeström, 1987) and third-order learning

(Bateson, 1985) offer the possibility of leaving the received world of cultural

suppositions and questioning problems encountered in different cultural

contextual understandings. This makes it possible both to reveal new forms

of cultural and social action and to transform contexts themselves.

In this respect, we can affirm that this is the nature of innovation and that it consists of the ability to extract ourselves from the available alternatives in order to solve problems and raise problems in systems with different presuppositions. This simply means looking at our own everyday practice from a different angle. Thus, for example, based on awareness of the contradictions of a traditional social or school practice, it is possible to design a different practice in which, by incorporating new tools, we can give rise to new ideas on the subject. (Sepúlveda, 2001: 8)

In this respect, cultural-historical activity theory and its application to

innovative learning and knowledge transfer (Engeström, 1987; Engeström &

Escalante, 1995; Tuomi-Gröhn, 2003; Säljö, 2003) regards the innovation

process as the co-construction of a new service, product or a process that

includes mobilization of additional cultural resources (including different

types of knowledge) and reciprocal learning.

Many authors argue that social inclusion and cohesion can only be advanced

by creating conditions that guarantee opportunities for all to learn, not just

21

the few. Democratic schools (Apple & Beane, 1995) and learning

communities (Jaussi, 2002; Hargreaves, 2003; Torres, 2004) are clear-cut

practical examples of educational and social efforts that attempt to work in

inclusive terms.

This is a pragmatic defiance that can be dealt with by specifically developing forms, experiences and opportunities permitting youngsters and adults from the social risk sector to be able to improve their available cultural information, acquiring knowledge, skills and attitudes not currently present in their cultural repertoire or in their cognitive codes... it is therefore necessary to ensure a viable bridge between local cultures and the most universal aspects of knowledge. (Sepúlveda, 2001:11)

Superficially it would seem that learning and knowledge building are closely

linked to one another. However, Scardamalia and Bereiter (2006)

differentiate between them. They consider that learning and knowledge

building are linked to yet different from one another and that they have

direct implications on the educational and working worlds. They point out

that different educational approaches maintain as essential goals that

students should succeed both in understanding big ideas in learning to think

for themselves. Achieving this requires development of educational

processes where students assume significant responsibility in their work

with ideas and parallel critical capacity. Some of these approaches have

impact on both educational and knowledge building dimensions.

The distinction between learning and knowledge building is easier to see when we move outside an educational context. Out in the world of what Peter Drucker termed ‘knowledge work’, many people are engaged in producing new knowledge. Their products may be scholarly things like theories, histories, and proofs or more practical things like designs, inventions, and plans. The common element is that these products constitute new or improved ideas that the community can use in producing more new or improved ideas. This continuing process of idea creation, development, and improvement is what we call ‘knowledge building’. In the process of knowledge building, the knowledge workers naturally learn, and such learning is essential to their careers as knowledge builders, but learning is not what they are getting paid for. It is not their job. Their job is knowledge building. (Scardamalia & Bereiter 2006: 4)

22

In terms of dialogic, expansive and third-order notions of learning, working

as a community and/or in collaboration is a crucial part of obtaining a more

complete and more complex understanding of learning. Thus, collaborative

learning and the creation of new learning environments based on trust

emerge as real driving forces in both education and work contexts

(Markkula, 2009; Hargreaves, 2003). The goal would seem to lie in the

consolidation of large communities, networks involving universities and

education, companies and governments who promote generation and

fostering of innovating processes and policy.

The evolution in the understanding of learning in today’s world and its

evolving role in work and education points to an important cultural change

around cooperation, collaboration and collective creation in widely different

cultural aspects. In this new culture, community and its relational meaning

take on transcendental value. Along with the idea of community is the goal

of union between sets of different communities shaping communicative

networking processes.

This raises a number of issues in relation to the extent to which good

practice examples develop a community of learners and overcome

traditional barriers to learning. It also raises issues concerning power

relations in the learning process and the extent to which learning

opportunities are collaborative or characterized by continuing hierarchical

boundaries. It finally creates the question of who builds the learning

process and the extent to which processes that promote creativity and

innovation also promote equity.

23

II. CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION: CONCEPTUAL CONVERGENCE

The ability to create new solutions with new tools for constantly emerging

new social needs underlines a key conceptual issue: creativity and

innovation as parts of learning. It is not always easy to differentiate

between these two concepts. Scott (1994) indicates that the terms

creativity and innovation are often used interchangeably in research

studies, and that distinction between the two concepts may be more one of

emphasis than of substance (West & Farr, 1990). In the late 1980s and

early 1990s some differentiation occurred:

• Creativity was defined as the production of novel and useful ideas

(Mumford & Gustafson, 1998) or doing something for the first time

anywhere or creating new knowledge (Woodman, Sawyer & Griffin,

1993: 293)

• Innovation was adoption or implementation of novel and useful ideas

(Kanter, 1988; Van de Ven, 1986) and encompassed adaptation of

products or processes from outside an organization.

More recently, West (2002) has synthesised research and theory to advance

the understanding of creativity and innovation implementation in groups at

work. This suggests creativity occurs primarily at early stages of innovation

processes with innovation implementation later. Amabile (1996) and later

West (2002) discuss influences such as task characteristics, group

knowledge diversity and skill, external demands, integrating group

processes and intragroup safety. Diversity of knowledge and skills is a

powerful predictor of innovation. But integration of group processes and

competencies are needed to enable the fruits of this diversity to be

harvested.

24

2.1. Creativity as an object of scientific study: genesis and development.

In earlier times, research focused primarily on the relationship between

intelligence and creativity. Galton (1879) promoted the claim that creative

products come from general ability. James (1880) formulated the idea of

divergent thinking. Terman and Cox (1926) affirmed that creativity is a

comprehensive part of intelligence (Fuentes et Torbay, 2004). Guilford is

generally credited as the forebear of empirical studies on creativity. His

discourse as director of the American Psychological Association (1950)

underlined the need to become aware of the value of creative talent as a

basis for industrial and economic development, as well as the natural

consequence of its development and fostering.

There are several implications in these possibilities that bear upon the importance of creative thinking. In the first place, it would be necessary to develop an economic order in which sufficient employment and wage earning would still be available. This would require creative thinking of an unusual order and speed. In the second place, eventually about the only economic value of brains left would be in the creative thinking of which they are capable. (Guilford, 1950: 448)

Since then, creativity studies have passed through different stages. These

range from views concentrating on the individual aspect to others more

systematic, contextual or socio-cultural. Aspects of creativity being

investigated in the beginning of the twenty-first century are quite distinct

from those emphasized during the last century. Work in the 1950s led to

three major lines of creativity research (Simonton, 2000; Craft, 2003):

• Personality

• Cognition

• Research on how to stimulate creativity

25

Earlier approaches emphasized the psychological determinants of genius

and giftedness. This was based on Guilford’s examination of the limitations

of intelligence tests and his investigation of divergent thinking.

He analyzed several factors (Piirto, 2004; Runco, 2009) of divergent

production:

• Fluency

• Novelty

• Flexibility

• Synthesizing ability

• Analyzing ability

• Reorganization or redefinition of already existing ideas

• Degree of complexity

• Evaluation.

Torrance, inspired by Guilford, developed a test to identify creative

potential. By the 1970s, the Torrance Test of Creative Thinking (TTCT) was

widely used in schools (Piirto, 2004). However, today it is widely agreed

among psychologists that divergent thinking tests do not predict creative

ability, and that divergent thinking is not the same as creativity. It has been

argued that creativity requires a complex combination of both divergent and

convergent thinking, and creative people switch back and forth at different

points in the creative process. Instead of studying creative personality,

cognitive psychologists shifted the focus to creative mental processes. They

tried to explain creativity by showing how it emerged from ordinary,

everyday mental processes (Sawyer, 2006).

Amabile has provided a comprehensive framework for the topic, explaining

that creativity arises through the confluence of knowledge, creative thinking

and motivation (Adams, 2005). Gardner further explored the topic, pointing

out that in-depth experience and long-term focus in one domain (technical

expertise) are the foundations of creativity. Sternberg (1999) however

promotes a triarchic theory concerning the relationship between creativity

26

and intelligence, asserting that the synthetic, analytical and practical

aspects of intelligence are keys for creativity expansion.

But it is Mihalyi Csikszentmihalyiís theoretical formulations that establish a

new landmark in creativity studies. Csikszentmihalyi argues that creativity

operates within a system that encompasses more than the cognitive,

including also milieu and context. Creativity does not happen inside people's

heads, but in the interaction between a person's thought and a socio-

cultural context (Csikszentmihalyi 1996: 23). Thereby, he regards creativity

a systemic rather than an individual phenomenon. Creativity is perceived as

the interrelation of three main components:

• Domain, which consists of a set of symbolic rules and procedures

• Field, which includes individuals acting as gatekeepers to the domain:

they decide whether certain ideas or product should be included in

the domain

• Person, who is responsible of generating novel ideas.

According to Csikszentmihalyiís model of creativity, the development of a

student’s or worker’s creativity depends on three interrelated components:

teachers/trainers (as experts on the field), school/work environment (as

domain) and a student/worker. According to this model, teachers/trainers

or co-students/ co-workers decide on the student’s/worker’s unconventional

thinking or acting based on their own previous experience, personal

preferences, values, educational or cultural backgrounds.

The consolidation and setting down of this complex concept of creativity has

also been enriched with subsequent theorisations made by Csikszentmihalyi

himself in collaboration with Howard Gardner and William Damon (2002).

Going further, they criticize his ‘naive former vision’ and analyse the ethical

and social aspects implicit in all creative, innovating activity. In effect, the

creative and innovatory practices described and interpreted by science and

research do not occur in an abstract vacuum - as if nothing were happening

in the external environment.

27

Educational and training efforts may be rooted in the structure and

dimensions of the labour market, where asking oneself why, what for and

who for is crucial. The analytical approach to professional practices is useful

for observing the metamorphosis of the creativity discourse of creativity.

Professional action (‘work well done’) in which creative and innovative

abilities question themselves about qualitative outcomes, thus addresses

human needs, beyond immediate interests of profit and gain.

According to Craft (2003), during the last thirty years creativity studies

have been led by systemic theories that regard creativity as a co-

functioning of several elements, including cognitive skills, personality traits,

social, cultural and historical factors. The current emphasis has shifted to

focus on ordinary creativity rather than genius, characterizing rather than

measuring, the social system rather than the individual. This can be

explored under four dimensions.

Creative teaching, teaching for creativity and creative learning.

Based on previous research on nurturing creativity in the school

environment (Cropley, 2009), three interrelated aspects are of central

importance.

• The teaching style and learning process supporting creative thinking

• Learning motivation that ensures openness to new ideas and

experiences

• Open learning environments as prerequisites for effective operation

of the previous two components.

Although the overall aim should be to ensure the expression of both

creativity of students and teachers, it has been criticized (Craft, 2003) since

terms with different meanings (e.g. creative teaching, teaching for creativity

and creative learning) are often used in the same sense. Creative teaching

(demonstrating original thinking and actions) may enhance learners’

creativity but also may not. Teaching for creativity, on the other hand,

refers to teaching certain subjects (e.g. creative writing, art, music

28

composition, design) regarded as developing creativity. Creative learning

refers to learning that leads to new original thinking.

Starting from the assumptions of socio-cultural approaches of creativity

studies, environmental factors of school, institution or workplace that

support and hinder learners’ creativity and motivation can be considered.

However it is important in attempting to carry out this task to consider

different definitions of creativity.

‘Big C’ creativity versus ‘everyday creativity’

Csikszentmihalyi makes a distinction between Big C and little c creativity.

The ‘Big C’ creative person is eminent, a person whose work is well known

by people within the field and domain. ‘Big C’ creativity is that which leads

to a domain being changed. ‘Little c’ creativity is what people use in their

everyday lives. Csikszentmihaly has defined creativity as any act, idea, or

product that changes an existing domain, or that transforms an existing

domain into a new one (Csikszentmihalyi, 1996: 28). Therefore, he is

concerned with ‘Big C’ Creativity in his works.

Similarly Singer, summarizing the opinions of several authors, argues that

creativity is domain-specific. One person may demonstrate strong creative

potential in more than one area, but social contexts, the 10 year-rule and

the stochastic elements of risk and chance may contain comparably

outstanding accomplishments across domains (Sternberg et al, 2004).

During the last few decades much has been written about the creativity of

great scientists and artists, what motivates them, or about childhood

factors. Current discourse about creativity, on the other hand, focuses often

on the ordinary, rather than extraordinary. The assumption is that the

ordinary person can be creative. Everyday creativity means coping with

changing environments, improvising and adapting flexibly with continuous

change. Thereby, everyday creativity is first of all survival capability

(Richards, 2007). In addition to coping with constantly changing

environments, everyday creativity means a powerful way of living. It is

29

suggested that creativity can even affect our health and wellbeing, personal

growth and development and the evolution of cultures (Richards, 2007).

Many writers argue that each person is capable of creative achievement

provided relevant skills have been acquired. This raises a number of

questions:

• To what extent do projects/processes recognize the potential for

creative achievement of every person and to what extent do they

attempt to develop creativity by means of a creative education (a

form of education capable of developing people’s capacities for

original ideas and action).

• Do projects/processes for promoting creativity have to involve

creative approaches to education?

• How do extraordinary and ordinary creativity connect? Are they part

of a continuum?

Some writers argue that, by stimulating the creativity of all, more creative

behaviour at all points in the continuum, is produced, including

extraordinary creativity. According to Sternberg, processes of ‘little c’

creativity and ‘big C’ creativity are similar or the same and it is simply the

impact that can differ on oneself or on the field (Sternberg, 2004). Although

some recent theories maintain that in the case of the genius a qualitative

and quantitative change takes place, Amabile (1996: 36) believes [...] that

without compelling evidence to the contrary it is most parsimonious to

assume a continuum of creativity in both products and processes.

Creativity as a unitary concept versus different types of creativity

Unsworth (2001) questions one of the premises of creativity research,

namely that creativity is a unitary construct. Creativity has been defined as

the production of novel ideas that are useful and appropriate to the

situation (Amabile, 1996). Creativity is based upon novel and useful ideas,

regardless of the type of idea, reasons behind its production, or the process

30

starting point. Unsworth argues that this belief in homogeneity of creativity

hinders a fine-tuned analysis of processes and factors involved in creativity.

Unsworth argues that theories (as in Amabile) on factors affecting creativity

at work fail to differentiate between types of creativity. Those types include:

• Responsive creativity (responding to presented problems because of

external driver)

• Expected creativity (discovering problems as response to external

drivers

• Contributory creativity (responding to presented problems because of

internal drivers

• Proactive creativity (discovering problems because of internal

drivers).

Creativity as a decision

Sternberg (2003) regards creativity as a decision. According to his

investment theory, creativity requires a confluence of six distinct but

interrelated resources:

• Intellectual abilities

• Knowledge

• Styles of thinking

• Personality

• Motivation

• Environment.

According to Sternberg, the skill of creativity itself is not enough - one

needs to make a decision to use the skill. This suggests that creativity can

be developed and is not simply located in the individual.

These descriptions of creativity connect creativity to the ability of a person

in the work place to meet individual and social human needs. This develops

in close interaction with social and cultural contexts and is associated with

31

the ability or opportunity to learn in constantly changing environments

(creative learning). Good practice examples help define what creativity

becomes:

• A quality attributable to all people that gives rise to small innovations

in immediate environments

• A process that leads to enormously important inventions for humanity

• A continuum.

32

2.2. Innovation as an object of scientific study: genesis and development.

Like creativity, innovation is associated with the tendency to think about

new and better ways of doing things and try them out in practice. According

to Jan Fagerberg (2003) interest in innovation began in the 1960s with the

landmark creation of the Science Policy Research Unit (SPRU) at the

University of Sussex. Innovation was not then a topic of interest to

economists because they associated economic change with issues such as

capital accumulation or market operation. Today, in contrast, many writers

are concerned with multidisciplinary research (in disciplines such as

economics, sociology, psychology, management) that considers how

innovation is stimulated by individuals, businesses, organizations and

networks.

The past focus was primarily on innovation in the market economy. For

example, the Oslo Manual stipulates that its object of study is confined to

innovations in the business sector (manufacturing industry, primary sector

and services) implying that less is known about innovation processes in

non-market-oriented sectors (p. 25). Regarding market innovation,

theorists like Schumpeter popularized the concept of creative destruction.

This suggested that that the economy is a dynamic system in which old

ways of doing things are destroyed and constantly displaced by new ones.

This dynamic view crystallizes in four different forms of innovation which

centre around attempts (led by entrepreneurs) to find new ways to exploit,

organize, source and supply new products, methods of production, markets

and businesses.

Today innovation concepts apply to a context where use of the Internet and

ICTs have reshaped the market economy (globalization) and have led to

unprecedented change in observed rhythms of growth and their intensity.

Knowledge has become the cornerstone on which to rest the development

and survival of companies and global regions. Creativity and innovation

have turned into new tools to lead processes effectively towards new aims.

33

Jan Fagerbert (2003) summarized the dominant discourse about the future

of the European and global economies.

• Innovation introduces novelty (variety) into the economic sphere - if

innovation stops, the economy does not increase

• Innovation tends to cluster in certain industries/sectors, which

consequently grow more rapidly leading to structural changes in

production and demand and, eventually, organizational and

institutional change

• Innovation is a powerful explanatory factor behind differences in

performance between firms, regions and countries. Those that

succeed in innovation prosper at the expense of less able

competitors.

This ideological ‘habitat’ has been particularly true at European level, where

innovation has been one of the central planks of policy statements and, in

particular, the Lisbon Declaration (now superseded by the September 2008

financial crisis and subsequent economic recession). At the level of policy

for the national Member States of the European Union, innovation has been

advanced as a common mantra indicating the way forward.

The influence of these conceptions in a context of intense competitiveness

on the world market has brought about a number of behavioural changes in

companies. Literature on the subject indicates four main trends reflecting

the effect of globalization on innovation processes (Bruce, 2009):

• Acceleration. Technological change has speeded up substantially over

the last few decades. This is mainly illustrated by the fact that the

time required to launch a new high-tech product has been

significantly reduced. The process from knowledge production to

commercialization is much shorter. The rapid development and wide

dissemination of ICT has played a key role in bringing about this

change.

• Inter-firm collaboration and industrial networks. New products are

increasingly integrating different technologies - technologies

34

increasingly based on different scientific disciplines. To master such a

variety of domains is impossible even for big organizations. This is

also reflected in the costs of developing new products and systems,

which have grown. Most firms do not have the capability or the

resources to undertake such initiatives - this is the main reason for

the expansion of collaborative schemes for research and the growing

importance of industrial networks.

• Functional integration and networking inside firms. Speedy

adaptation and innovation gives the functionally integrated firm an

advantage. Flexibility, interdisciplinarity and cross-fertilization of

ideas at managerial and laboratory levels within the firm are now

important keys for success.

• Collaboration with knowledge production centres. Increasing reliance

on advances in scientific knowledge for major new technological

opportunities has been an important stimulus for firms to collaborate

with scientific centres like public and private laboratories, universities

and other basic and applied research centres.

These trends, more visible in some countries than in others, reveal a new

and more collaborative interconnected and relational conception in company

culture. They evoke a socio-economic model where the key to success is

using much greater degrees of diversity, interdependency and complexity to

manage risk and achieve goals. This way of doing things is diametrically

opposed to techniques of hierarchy, simplification, uniformity and control

used during the industrial era (Miller, 2003). The emergence of new cultures

in company practices raise questions on the concept of competitiveness.

The Blue Ocean Strategy (Chan Kim & Mauborge, 2005) or Von Hippels

(2005) contributions on user-centered innovation (in the sense of

democratizing innovation), for example, open up debates concerning the

relationship between competitiveness, innovation, involvement,

participation and democratic practice.

In parallel with the universalization of the creativity concept in recent years,

there has been further diversification of the concept of innovation, from one

that is linked with the economic sphere of private companies to one that is

35

linked with more public and social areas (social innovation). Social

innovation is defined as innovative activities and services that are motivated

by the goal of meeting a social need and that are predominantly developed

and diffused through organizations whose primary purposes are social

(Young Foundation, 2007). The accent is undoubtedly placed on the idea of

social and human need.

Figuerdo (2009) distinguishes importantly between the concepts of

incremental innovation and disruptive innovation. Incremental innovation

builds on existing thinking, products, processes organizations or social

systems. They can be routine improvements or they can be dramatic

breakthroughs but they address the very core of what already exits.

Disruptive innovation is addressed to people who do not have any solutions.

It takes place in simple, undemanding applications that are not

breakthrough. People are happy to use them in spite of their limitations

because no other solutions exist.

It is important to note that social and economic innovations are not black

and white concepts. A widening of the concepts of economic and social

innovation suggests that both can enrich traditional views of competition

and innovation by promoting the idea that both society and the economy

benefit from each other. For example, recent organizational innovation has

led to new forms of business organization that incorporate ‘the social’

(development of learning environments or communities in business that

involve sharing, openness, interdependence) without undermining the

classic concept of competitiveness (a typical example of this is the Basque

cooperative movement: Mondragon, CAF).

Innovation is a process that can stimulate research in other sectors of

economic, social and cultural life with objectives going beyond simply

making a profit. The knowledge gained from exploration, experimentation

and exchange of the practices stimulating learning can be utilised to

overcome the narrow limits of pragmatic and instrumental views of

creativity (Villalba, 2008) or to encourage innovation that connects new

36

conceptions of human development and competitiveness with the search for

new forms of social life (Carr, 1990).

Despite the apparent value of the concept and processes of social

innovation, little research has been conducted on the subject. The

investment budgets of governments and businesses are primarily spent on

business innovation, rather than solutions for common human needs. The

ways in which social innovation is produced and how experiences, ideas and

methods may be shared to accelerate solutions to the social problems

requires attention.

Several authors have tried to conceptualize social innovation and have

proposed prerequisites to the creativity and innovation process:

• Social innovation involves implementation of new ideas. The ideas

and the creative thinking behind them are not enough if the ideas are

not adopted. (Mulgan et al, 2007; Mumford, 2002)

• Social innovation satisfies emerging societal needs and is related to

socially desirable goals (Mouleart et al, 2005; Mulgan, 2006) -

socially important questions are answered

• Social innovation requires changes in social relations (Mouleart et al,

2005) and in everyday practices (Hamalainen, 2005;Hamalainen &

Heiskala 2007; Mumford & Moertl, 2003) - wider impact is anticipated

• Social innovation is a collective phenomenon and characterized by the

development of networks (Mumford, 2002).

Maintaining a holistic and systematic view of the creative process underlines

the importance of interaction between people, mediated by socio-cultural

contexts. This has led to understanding that innovation is not just a

technological-economic process but rather a complex interactive social

process in which many actors with different knowledge bases take part

(Tuomi, 2002). A wider and more systematic understanding of the

innovation processes involved has complemented the traditional linear

model of innovation. This has led to the creation of network models when

conceptualizing innovation (Schienstock, Hamalainen, 2001; SITRA, 2005;

37

Hamalainen, 2005; Tuomi, 2002). When the linear model looks at

innovation as an exceptional phenomenon based on a preliminary study, the

contemporary views refer to innovation as a fairly ordinary economic

practice related to work-based learning, changing market demands or new

possibilities of recombining existing knowledge in new ways or applying it in

different contexts (Schienstock, Hamalainen, 2001). Therefore innovation is

understood as new products and services as well as changes in the

application of technologies or adaptation of new ones. Organizational

innovations and new activities imply new knowledge.

The current financial crisis and subsequent impact on other economic

sectors have challenged neo-liberal belief in free competition and market

deregulation. The effects of this crisis on the global economy and people's

lives are still to be seen. There have been long-standing theoretical and

empirical challenges to neo-liberal perspectives. Such criticisms are found in

sociology (Habermas, 1984), pedagogy (Freire, 1997; Morin, 2003; Gadotti,

2003; etc.), psychology (Gardner, 2007) and economics (Sen, 1999; Davis,

2006). These see development as a process of expanding real freedoms and

criticize narrower versions of development (related to GDP growth, rising

personal incomes, industrialization, technological advances or social

modernity). Development requires removal of sources of deprivation:

poverty, tyranny, lack of economic opportunities, neglect of public services,

intolerance or violation of human rights (Sen, 1999).

This poses key questions around development of methodologies to

understand how projects and processes confront socio-political policy

analysis of creativity and innovation. More restrictive conceptualizations see

creativity and innovation as an agenda based on econometric concerns. At

the centre of this discussion is the question on how to develop methods that

investigate construction of learning and knowledge to transform power

relations, as in the concept of development at a human scale (Max-Neef,

2000).

Human needs, self-reliance and organic articulations are the pillars which support Human Scale Development. However, these pillars must be sustained on a solid foundation which is the creation of the conditions where people are the protagonists of their future. If people

38

are to be the main actors in Human Scale Development both the diversity as well as the autonomy of the spaces in which they act must be respected. Attaining the transformation of an object-person into a subject-person in the process of development is, among other things, a problem of scale. There is no possibility for the active participation of people in gigantic systems which are hierarchically organized and where decisions flow from the top down to the bottom. Human Scale Development assumes a direct and participatory democracy.(Max-Neef, 2000:7)

Beyond conceptual nuances, reality shows that innovation processes are of

great social value. The proliferation of blogs, websites, networks, projects

highlight their value. One report (Young Foundation, 2007) on economic

growth suggests that 50-80% of economic value comes from innovation.

There is sufficient evidence that social innovation is an important value not

only for development but also economic growth. Overcoming obstacles to

sustained growth would seem to be achievable through the development of

processes of social innovation.

Innovation is a concept originally related to practical application and

development of new ideas in the industrial world with a key focus on

boosting competitiveness. However, the development of new technologies

affecting production, use and distribution of knowledge - combined with the

grave global structural problems - raises a parallel debate on the ultimate

aims of innovation. The twin aims of understanding processes and practice

in teaching/learning that promote innovation and creativity is intrinsically

linked to producing social value and contributing to both economic and

human needs.

39

III. CREATIVE AND INNOVATIVE LEARNING IN THE WORLD OF WORK AND EDUCATION

Any kind of innovation is related to both individual and collective learning.

Innovation does not consist of only new technologies, products, services

and processes. It also operates through different ways of learning as part of

the innovation process in which individual and organizational skills are

developed. A large part of this learning is work-based - learning that

happens in a work context and is related to the need to solve different

problems (Loogma, 2004). Cultural-historical activity theory and its

applications in studies on learning and knowledge transfer relate to

innovation (Engeström, 1987; Engeström & Escalante, 1995; Tuomi-Gröhn,

2003; Säljö, 2003). Many authors regard the innovation process as a co-

construction of a new service, product or a process that includes

mobilization of additional cultural resources (including different types of

knowledge) and reciprocal learning.

One of the main contemporary sources of innovation are inter-

organizational relations and learning networks. Researchers of social

innovation argue that social innovation often rises in the interaction of

individuals with different backgrounds (Mumford, 2002; Mumford & Moertl,

2003). This argument is supported by writers who argue that innovation

often arises in the border-zones of different but adjacent activity systems

(Tuomi-Gröhn & Engeström, 2003). Interaction between different

networked activity systems leads not only to transfer of knowledge and

skills, but also to active interpretation and re-construction of culture-specific

knowledge. Some of the most favourable conditions for knowledge transfer

and expansive learning are border-zones of different activity systems -

schools, companies, public institutions (Tuomi-Gröhn, 2003). One of the

examples of how boundary objects have been developed and innovative

learning facilitated is Lambert’s model of learning studio (Lambert, 2003),

an intervention aimed at promoting innovative learning and knowledge

transfer in vocational teacher education. The learning studio is an example

40

of boundary encounter between a teacher education institution, VET schools

and workplaces.

Some authors of network perspective studying mechanisms of how social

context influences creative performance suggest that weak network ties are

preferable to strong ties when it comes to stimulating creativity at work.

Weaker ties are more likely to connect people with diverse perspectives,

different outlooks, varying interests and diverse approaches to problems.

Moreover, it has been suggested that individuals occupying a peripheral

position in a network with a large number of connections outside the

network will have the highest creativity at work, compared both to more

central actors and other peripheral actors with fewer outside connections

(Perry-Smith et al, 2003). Creative and innovative learning requires the

genesis of new educational spaces and time combined with a redefinition of

existing educational models in order to be able to ensure effective open

interaction between actors (people, organizations, activity systems) with

different backgrounds and knowledge.

There is a centrifugal force that tries to remove training from the traditional

paradigm taking shelter in formal, public, state-subsidized teaching directed

at all citizens as subjects with educational rights in school spaces and times

and endeavours to reroute it towards a new training paradigm with plural

learning options, subsidized by the purchasing power of citizens seen as the

consumers of a service circulating in the market network. A model meaning

increasingly greater amounts of investment in training, which have a direct

repercussion on the workers’ pockets and/or company budgets (Sanz,

2006: 404).

The fact that a series of institutions exist which increasingly depend on the

open commercial market rather than the public education system, may

increase situations of injustice or social inequality. It is important to

highlight this at public policy level so that society can take responsibility for

ensuring the rewarding (Illich, 1971) and democratic (Reimer, 1986) nature

of new forms of access to innovative learning.

41

3.1. Society, learning and work

The increased importance of innovation reflects the fact that it represents a

major response to intensifying competition by enhancing the learning

abilities of firms and workers. Neither firms, regions nor communities can

establish sustainable growth without innovation and learning. The scope of

the challenges posed by the globalizing learning economy requires that

innovation policies should be reformulated to include a learning component.

In the EU context there are two dimensions that should be carefully taken

into account when discussing the contents of any new policy approach.

First is the horizontal dimension, whereby different policy areas should be

effectively coordinated to produce synergies to enhance the learning ability

of the system. Second is the vertical dimension of this coordination, where

European, national and regional instruments and strategies are brought into

line with this new approach, complementing and supporting each other in

order to foster innovation throughout the EU.

These policy areas need to be adjusted and coordinated in such a way that

they promote innovation and growth without undermining social cohesion.

This points to the need for coordination of sectorial policies that have

traditionally been regarded as more or less independent. Competition policy

might be regarded as an instrument for effectively speeding up change, but

it must be tuned and adjusted to the potential for innovation, for human

resource development and for potentially re-distributive goals.

These issues are related to profound changes in society in general and to

the structured world of work in particular. There is a general acceptance

that traditional schooling, the ‘front-end loading’ approach for preparation

for the world of work, is no longer appropriate. This is so for a number of

reasons which include:

• Rapid changes in the world of work

• The changing nature of goals for education and training

42

• The realization that most people will have a number of occupations

and job changes during the period of their working life.

Emphasis has evolved from a concentration on instrumental concepts of

vocational education as a preparation for work during the years of formal

schooling, towards a concept of lifelong learning that is work related. There

is a growing realization that - as well as highly specific job-related technical

skills - the demands of the workplace make it imperative that social and

interpersonal knowledge, skills and competencies be incorporated into any

programme of learning both for and in the world of work.

Traditional companies often saw basic training as being all that was required

- enough to learn to do the job. This stratified and minimalist approach fits

badly with the realities of rapidly changing external environments where all

employees have to work together in anticipating both change and challenge.

In this context employees are no longer seen as merely selling their labour.

They are also seen as producers who have the capacity and, some would

say, an obligation to learn. Many companies increasingly see on-the-job

learning as essential to growth and to enhanced competitiveness. This is

because new skills are continually being acquired by staff. New ways of

using old skills are also being learned.

The learning organization produces employees who are:

• Adaptable

• Flexible

• Innovative

• Pro-active

• Responsible

• Highly motivated.

A range of literature suggests that workplaces must be turned into

sophisticated professional learning organizations in order to ensure that

43

learning becomes consolidated as an essential part of the organizational

culture.

This is a kind of learning which, in constantly demanding interaction with those equal to and different from us, requires large doses of intelligence and of emotional understanding that enables workers and managers to motivate and improve their relationships with colleagues, to bounce back from adversity, to work through the difficulties and disappointing moments of change, to build high-performing teams, to solve problems effectively, to value the diverse learning styles and cultural backgrounds of team-mates, and to solve conflicts when they arise.(Hargreaves, 2003: 39).

In a globalized environment work is no longer a uniform progression of

production and consumption but is also an unfolding of a profound

restructuring of all social, cultural, personal and ethnic relationships and

understandings. The fact remains however, that modern society is

displaying worrying levels of uneven development and disturbing levels of

documented inequality, poverty and discrimination. Environmental

degradation, homelessness, two-tier social service provision, absence of

planning, asset stripping of public services and blind reliance on ever-

increasing consumption patterns are but some of the indicators of current

social malaise.

In such a context the ability to cut costs, maintain increased production

rates and maintain competitiveness may tend to dominate all commercial

thinking and forward planning. When the imperative is to survive from day

to day, most companies can find issues around learning, planning, staff

qualifications and innovation either esoteric or irrelevant. It is suggested

that the role of the employer is to marshal economic and productive activity

to meaningful social ends. In this sense, employment can become

participation in profitable activities - profitable to all social stakeholders and

not just shareholders. Work itself, in this sense, goes beyond the mere

provision of jobs to the creation of value - in both economic and social

senses.

Learning, in the employment context, is most effectively understood when

positively linked with:

44

• Creativity

• Problem resolution

• Change management

• Diversity and inclusion

• Improved communications.

Employers who have seen learning as more than skill-specific training have

been able to benefit from the extraordinary potential of new and diverse

elements in their workforces. This has meant that the voyage of discovery

around learning has become centrally linked to the strategic learning needs

of the employers concerned. The learning of the organization is tied directly

to the learning needs of each and every employee. Employers and

organizations who see only cost implications in the provision of work-based

learning are, at the least, missing out on the extraordinary potential of

thinking and acting in different ways.

Innovation is literally doing what has not been done before. It calls for

considerable creativity for employers to develop innovative practices. It is

often a veritable leap into the unknown. Yet all the evidence is that the

companies who achieve success do so because they are doing something

new - or something old in a new way. Innovation is not about market

gimmicks. It is about products and skills that emerge from new ways of

organization and human creativity. Innovation is based upon learning from

the past as much as about anticipating the needs of the future.

One certainty is that traditional ways of designing, producing and selling can

and will not work in the longer term. Traditional recruitment, training and

promotion practices will fail to maintain jobs if the only perspective is

competition with low wage economies or an undignified scramble to attract

inward job creation at any price.

Enterprises are becoming more aware that they need to become both more

flexible and more responsive to their external environments. The dynamic of

work-based learning offers not just the opportunity to meet minimum

obligations to staff. It offers an opportunity to maximize and sustain

45

profitable enterprise that benefits the entire community. The business

learning organization is by its nature innovative. It also values best practice

and the quality that focuses not merely on product characteristics but also

on the process that produces both consistently excellent goods and a

motivated workforce.

It is possible to observe that the meaning of work is experiencing a

redefinition in contemporary society. As a result, new concerns are arising

in working environments related to the connection between learning,

creativity and innovation. A number of these concerns are related to:

1. Promoting learning in companies and among workers

2. Recognition, evaluation and accreditation of learning in environments

other than formal, given that the traditional academic mode has lost

its monopoly over learning

3. Processes permitting development and consolidation of human capital

4. Optimizing the creativity arising from the effect of the wealth of social

diversity, more evident now than in earlier epochs

5. Systems to guarantee equal learning opportunities in a world affected

by inequality, within a context of fair social distribution of knowledge.

This suggests investigation of processes through which knowledge and

learning are recognized and how organizations cater for diverse learners in

diverse work places. It also raises questions for the development of

methodologies to understand of teaching and learning that promotes

flexible and equitable creativity and innovation while also enabling formal

recognition systems for learning.

46

3.2. New learning environments: networking and community based learning

As in the world of work, social change and the evolution of learning requires

change in other sectors, including education. The strength of today’s

educational relationship is based on learning - above all on the specification

of contextual conditions to guarantee meaning and relevance. Environments

in the framework of lifelong learning where students assume responsibility

for creating and developing their learning is a balance between individual

and collective effort. The link between innovation and learning communities

and articulation of best practice is critical. Lifelong learning is at its most

effective when applied in community contexts. It also requires an attitudinal

and cultural change on the part of governments, policy makers, education

providers, learners and community actors. Community based learning,

particularly in its lifelong learning and adult education initiatives, requires

more than government intervention or formal policy statements.

Local communities must be actively involved and committed. First, society

as a whole must:

• Value learning

• Support those who continue to learn

• Make learning part of their country’s culture.

Second is the issue of resources - this is a perennial problem. This can be

addressed at community level by affirming and promoting the notion that

education serves the community in many ways. These extend far beyond

the purely economic concerns of society. Social change is mediated and can

be directed at community levels if learning is pro-active and centred on

community needs.

The community is based around the need for learning in a variety of ways

and levels. These encompass:

47

• Community development

• Social solidarity

• The role of volunteering

• Environmental management and conservation

• Social inclusion measures

• Religious bodies and groups

• Arts and culture

• Sports and leisure

• Health and well-being.

At times of significant social change, communities need to be re-defined in

such a way as to be meaningful to the individuals who live there.

Community appropriation of lifelong learning and meaningful vocational

education applications entails a greater responsibility for growth and

advancement lying with the individual. With respect to community

development, individuals need to start seeing themselves differently They

need to see the importance of managing their own careers and to accept

responsibility for learning across a lifespan - not just while in school or

within formal learning structures.

If in society as a whole working with others, dialogue and collaboration

between different people is the obvious foundation of the construction of

any cultural, economic and political environment, education is equally

important. This is where the idea of community, shared and communicated,

takes on particular importance.

Community is not limited to the field of education. The past few decades

have witnessed increased interest in the concept of community in general.

Much of this interest stems from American perspectives and is based on the

perception that sense of community in the United States is weak and there

is a need to get American citizens to think about working together toward

the common good (Etzioni, 1993). John Goodlad of the University of

Washington, Head of the Institute for Educational Renewal, echoed these

sentiments in the 1990 editorial of the Holistic Education Review.

48

Our culture does not nourish that which is best or noblest in the human spirit. It does not cultivate vision, imagination, or aesthetic or spiritual sensitivity. It does not encourage gentleness, generosity, caring, or compassion. Increasingly in the late twentieth century, the economic-technocratic-static worldview has become a monstrous destroyer of what is loving and life-affirming in the human soul. (Goodlad:1997:p. 125).

In the past few decades, there has been a growing movement to reinvent

the way citizens learn and a fundamental re-appraisal of the methods

through which young people are introduced into society. This offers a

challenge to traditional schooling and education systems based on formal

teaching and instructional methods. Learning communities put an

innovative focus on:

• Methodologies: distance, open learning, asynchronous and student

centered

• Lifelong learning

• Freedom and opportunity in subject choice and pedagogy

• Flexibility: resources, location and modularization

• Choice and autonomy

• Civic culture: responsibility, communitarism and trust.

The learning community does not have simply one way of defining and

understanding it. In the first place, a community is a series of people or

social entities with a shared vision. Hence, a learning community has the

goal of readiness to learn. It is a community open to the environment,

where the aim is to interact constructively. Second, different uses of this

concept are occurring in social and educational practice to take into

consideration (Torres, 2004).

Although they have many basic forms, learning communities in the

traditional school environment share two common academic elements:

shared or collaborative learning and connected learning. In general,

collaborative learning activities group students together to explore or apply

the course material; these approaches have been linked to significantly

enhanced learning. Collaborative learning in the curricular learning

49

community model emerges as communities enroll the same students in

several common courses, thereby increasing the likelihood of an integrated

social and academic experience. Connected learning, in turn, encourages

students to connect ideas from different disciplines. This emerges in the

learning community model from the fact that the shared courses are

organized or linked around a single theme (Pascarella and Terenzini; Zhao

and Kuh, 2004). As a result of these two common academic elements,

learning communities represent a constructivist approach to knowledge,

encouraging students to socially construct their own knowledge rather than

simply accepting the information transmitted by the instructor. As a result,

learning is deeper, more personally relevant, and becomes a part of who

the student is, not just something the student has (Zhao and Kuh, 2004, p.

117).

The cooperative and connected learning environments established as part of

a learning community promote both academic and social engagement

(Tinto, 1997). Decades of research on academic engagement,

operationalized as effort or involvement, suggests that, other things being

equal, the more the student is psychologically engaged in academic and

academic-related activities and tasks that reinforce and support the formal

academic experience the more he or she will learn (Pascarella and

Terenzini, 2005). In terms of social engagement, the collaborative nature of

learning communities promotes student-to-student interaction and student-

to-faculty interaction (Ewell, 1994); both types of interaction are correlated

with improved outcomes for students (Pascarella and Terenzini, 2005;

Tinto, 1997).

A learning community is lodged in a human and territorial community,

based on a common project towards which all agents involved work,

generating and developing ideas. This concept is related to different

contexts.

• School and after-school (formal, non-formal and informal

organization, and the classroom itself as a community).

• The virtual classroom, mediated by ICT, generating networks

50

between people, education centres, professional communities,

companies.

The Cedefop (2008) definition recognizes the different contexts, defining a

learning community as promoting a culture of learning by developing

effective local partnerships between all sectors of the community,

supporting and motivating individuals and organizations to learn. Virtual

communities foster new relational atmospheres through:

• Network socializing processes, the exchange of experiences and the

construction of processes and ideas.

• Geographic areas (city, district, groups of areas).

• Economic and human development processes or the development of

social capital.

• Citizen participation and development processes.

• Professional development processes in which professionals work and

learn in the framework of powerful learning communities. The

European Distance and E-learning Network (EDEN) exemplifies a

virtual learning community, its purpose being to involve actors in a

European community of expertise to share experiences on how e-

learning can be used to strengthen individual, organizational, local

and regional development, digital learning literacy, best practice and

extended access.

Academic educational literature contains clear examples of centres working

based on the community idea (Apple & Beane, 1995; Jaussi, 2002). These

centres are deeply involved in discovering practical ways of increasing the

significant participation of all people playing a part in the educational

experience (families, volunteers, students, neighbourhood residents). The

goal is a more participative model, where teachers work jointly with one

another in the collective interests of students, school and the social setting.

It is envisaged that students are committed, active participants in their

learning and their community and teachers learn continually, while

equipped with resources to reflect and act. It is intended that families and

51

community play a real part in programmes and educational decision-

making.

The learning community framework contains a different concept of the

educational relationship, the education agent, inter-institutional relationship

and the general contexts. This is because:

• All are considered as learning objects: adults, youngsters, families

• Intergenerational, mutual learning and learning between equals is

encouraged

• The whole community is a potential agent to assume educational

functions

• It maintains a holistic view of education and society

• It fosters creation of innovation networks

• It is a social project that promotes educational work

• Lifelong learning lies at the root of all activity.

In Spain, the idea of learning community has been detailed in a socio-

educational project engaging a wide network of centres spread over several

autonomous communities. Main features include pluralism and openness,

endowing it with a diversity mirroring the wider society. These Spanish

examples highlight how organizations can:

• Overcome inequalities

• Provide people with comprehensive education as a response to unmet

needs

• Equip people with dialogue and critical analysis to contribute to the

construction of a more egalitarian, intercultural and inclusive society.

Questions arising centre on to what extent change in educational practices

can be achieved and on the development of methods to allow VET, work-

based and adult education to meet the challenges of contemporary

education and society. The transformation from industrial organizations to

informational organizations is a critical strategic imperative. Competence is

not limited to the cognitive use of theory or concepts but encompasses

52

technical skills, interpersonal attributes and ethical values (Cedefop 2008;

European Commission, 2006).

53

3.3. Towards new forms of professionalism

The redefinition of all social and educational areas, and of the elements that

foster them, requires analysis as well as change in ways of understanding

professions. Both the working and educational worlds urgently require the

insertion of new ways of understanding the role of professionals within a

series of very widely differing socio-historical coordinates. Today it is out of

the question that anyone can work alone. The Freirian assertion that nobody

knows everything or nothing, but that we learn ‘with’ others, has taken on

real presence and value. Nobody knows enough or could hope to achieve

enough knowledge to go it alone. Knowledge creation involves

reconstructing understanding to permit actors to imagine more creative and

innovative situations. Involvement in actions and problem-solving within

wider groups around a common purpose is imperative for innovation.

Whether called teams, communities, networks, the underlying fact is the

need to think with others, from different angles, to produce new ideas.

Professional culture thus needs reconstruction at several levels. In

education, both adult learners and vocational learners need engagement

action of committed professionals who are aware of needs and contexts.

Professionals need to promote projects based on community values,

collective participation and multiculturalism. Finally learners need to

become involved in the educational processes to think and act above and

beyond the seductions and demands of the knowledge economy

(Hargreaves 2003: 76).

54

IV. DEVELOPING COMPETENCES IN CREATIVITY AND INNOVATION

Creative competencies that lead to innovation need to be underpinned by

tolerance, openness, flexibility, autonomy, support and collaboration. These

issues require complex approaches to innovation and creativity that take

account of individual capabilities, group values and formal/informal

organization rules.

4.1. Creative competences that should be developed to get innovation

Creativity is possible in all areas of human activity. As all people have

creative abilities, these have to be developed to get innovation. Knowing

the characteristics of the creative individual is very useful to define learning

experiences that enhance creativity. Some research has been conducted to

understand better the personal characteristics of creative individuals,

especially in cognitive psychology. Not only personal characteristics of an

individual or possession of certain competence inevitably lead to innovative

solutions - environmental factors are of equal importance. Jane Piirto

(2004: 135-146) offers a conceptual framework - the Pyramid of Talent

Development - that considers person, process, and product, as well as

environmental factors. It includes 5 aspects of creativity:

1. The genetic aspect: Talent in domains, inborn or innate.

2. The emotional aspect: personality attributes present some way in

highly creative persons. These may be innate to a certain extent, but

can also be developed, encouraged, and directly taught. These

attributes include androgyny, creativity, imagination, insight,

introversion, intuition, naiveté, openness to experience, over-

excitability, passion for work in a domain, perceptiveness,

perfectionism, persistence, preference for complexity, resilience, risk-

taking, self-discipline, self-efficacy, tolerance for ambiguity, and

55

volition or will.

3. The cognitive aspect: Piirto claims that the cognitive dimension in the

form of an IQ score has been over-emphasized with regard to

creativity. A reasonable level of intelligence may be necessary and

helpful for creative production, but for creativity, formal intelligence

is a minor ingredient. Things like motivation- wanting to create - are

more important

4. Environmental ‘suns’ that could be linked to certain factors in the

environment, including positive and nurturing home environment;

community and culture conveying values compatible with the

educational institution and supporting home and school; school;

gender.

5. Chance.

Cropley (Cropley, 2009: 147-150), however, divides properties of the

individual into cognitive, personal and motivational properties. Among

cognitive aspects fostering creativity would include:

• Rich and varied experiences in many settings

• Fund of general knowledge

• Specialized knowledge

• Skill at seeing connections, overlaps, similarities and logical

implications (convergent thinking)

• Skill at making remote associations, linking apparently separate fields

and forming new gestalts (divergent thinking)

• Preference for accommodating rather than assimilating

• Ability to recognize and define problems

• Ability to plan personal learning and evaluate progress (executive or

metacognitive abilities)

In the case of personality, creativity requires:

• Openness to new ideas and experiences

• Adventurousness

• Autonomy

56

• Ego strength

• Positive self-evaluation and high self-esteem

• Acceptance of all (even contradictory) aspects of oneís own self

• Preference for complexity

• Tolerance for ambiguity.

In order to foster motivational aspects, teachers should seek to foster in

students:

• A concept of creativity and a positive attitude to it

• Curiosity

• Willingness to risk being wrong

• Drive to experiment

• Task commitment, persistence and determination

• Willingness to try difficult tasks

• Desire for novelty

• Freedom from domination by external rewards (intrinsic motivation)

• Readiness to accept a challenge

• Readiness for risk taking.

Clark (2008), following her holistic vision of the concept of creativity, has

gathered the characteristics and abilities of creative people described in

various research papers (Amabile,1990; Sternberg & Lubart, 1993; Runco

& Nemiro , 1994) and classified them in four groups of creative individuals:

Cognitive Rational; Affective/ Social; Physical/ Sensing; Intuitive. Thus,

creativity, like all human abilities, is something all human beings have to a

greater or lesser extent. It can be improved over the years, while its

expression, according to Sternberg and Lubart (1997), requires knowledge,

intrinsic motivation and knowing how to display the new product. This

implies developing both inter- and intra-personal skills (such as the trust,

independent thought and communication described by Clark and Cropley).

Formal education should therefore work on the different human abilities and

intelligences (Gardner, 1993) and include them in the curriculum.

57

This raises questions on the methodologies required to understand how

learning processes and practices stimulate motivation and build on the

capacities of the social actors in defined learning spaces. It also raises

questions for how examples of best practice can inform learners who have

different capacities, strengths and weaknesses.

58

4.2. Methodology, processes and conditions that develop creative competences to create innovation.

According to Cropley (2009), personal attributes mentioned earlier are

highly dependent on various environmental systems in which creative

individuals become active. Cropley (2009) highlights the ways in which

systems can be discouraging or inhibiting, or on the other hand nurturing,

stimulating or inspiring. It is suggested that organizations and systems

should be interested in the provision of a creativogenic climate that

embraces the concept of open teaching and learning as well as providing

the essential conditions for fostering creativity (Cropley, 2009: 147-150).

Creativity requires social environments to stretch individuals, balancing the

opportunity to act autonomously with the potential to collaborate with

stimulating groups and networks. It is also suggested that systems have to

involve tolerance, flexibility, openness and diversity (Cropley, 2009,

Sternberg 2003/2007). Several processes that promote tolerance are

detailed:

• Acceptance of difference

• Openness and tolerance of variability

• Absence of rigid sanctions against mistakes

• Encouraging and accepting constructive non-conformist behaviour

• Encouraging and accepting original ideas

• Creating an atmosphere free from anxiety and time pressure without

abandoning responsibility

• Establishing psychological security, openness and freedom

• Encouraging sensible risk-taking

• Encouraging tolerance of ambiguity

• Allowing mistakes.

A parallel set of processes that promote autonomy, reflection and self-

efficacy is described:

59

• Enabling self-directed work, allowing a high degree of initiative,

spontaneity and experimentation without fear of sanction against

incorrect solutions, errors, or mistakes

• Creating organizational and structural conditions that allow open and

reversible distribution of roles, themes and problems, as well as

sharing of activities

• Fostering identification of the person with learning activities by

allowing self-determination and joint responsibility

• Supporting the development of positive self-assessment and a

favourable self-concept

• Increasing autonomy in/of learning by recognition and self-evaluation

of progress

• Fostering intense concentration and task commitment through high

motivation and interest in self-selected topics

• Redefinition of problems

• Questioning and analysis of assumptions

• Helping persons build self-efficacy.

Processes that stretch and support creativity are also listed:

• Offering meaningful enrichment of learners’ perceptual horizons

• Providing challenging and stimulating learning materials

• Providing support and positive feedback for questioning and exploring

behavior and problem-finding, not just problem solving

• Making it possible for persons to experience social creativity during

group interactions and through joint projects with self-selected

partners

• Reducing stress on achievement and avoiding negative stress by

introducing playful activities

• Nurturing sensibility, flexibility and divergent thinking

• Learning to sell creative ideas and persuade others

• Encouraging idea generation

• Encouragement to identify and surmount obstacles

• Helping persons to find their interests

• Role modeling creativity

60

• Cross - fertilizing ideas across subjects and disciplines

• Allowing time for creative thinking

• Rewarding creativity

• Encouraging collaboration.

The concept of open learning and instruction indicates a changed and

enriched role for the teacher, who is no longer merely instructor, evaluator

and authority, but rather stimulator, moderator, helper, counsellor,

facilitator, participating observer, initiator, partner, instructor, mentor and

model (Cropley, 2009).

The above list of processes are extremely important as they may provide

the type of criteria by which everyday efficacy of best practice examples can

be evaluated in terms of the generation of innovation and creativity.

Specific and practical case examples provide substantive, qualitative and in-

depth models of what conceptual categories actually mean in different

socio-cultural contexts.

61

CONCLUSIONS

The way learning is understood in today’s world has evolved dramatically. It

seems clear that the social spaces, organizations and policies that promote

forms of learning based on cooperation, collaboration and collective creation

from different cultural viewpoints, (based on the community idea) have

enormous possibilities for anticipating economic and social changes. They

also consolidate human potential, itself capable of both creating and

innovating.

Nevertheless, it is not always easy to differentiate between the concepts of

creativity and innovation. Creativity is a human ability developed in close

interaction with context, associated with the ability to learn in constantly

changing environments. It is attributable to all people and capable of

development. It is interesting to define the learning experiences which can

improve the creativity residing inside everyone, taking account genetic

factors, emotional aspects, domain-specific talent, cognitive and

environmental factors. At the end of the day, creativity is an increasingly

important value, both with respect to individual development and to

achieving professional and cultural development in a constantly changing

society which demands innovative responses.

On the other hand, innovation cannot be reduced to a simple matrix of

definitions, norms and procedures. To do so would be to reduce a complex

process of cognition, design and intentionality to a mere set of procedures

which, given the right environment and circumstances, could be reproduced

in any number of settings. Innovation involves a radical re-evaluation of

existing circumstances and conditions. It involves asking a rigorous set of

questions that interrogate what the current situation is and then sets results

against what could (or more intriguingly, should) be. Innovation exists in

real environments with strongly established structures and modes of

ownership which may, by their nature, be antipathetic to any form of

questioning or new thought.

62

We locate innovation in the key framework of contemporary life - the

process of globalization. Globalization powerfully affects all human

relationships and structures. It shapes our very understanding of

knowledge, information, values and power. It is not an abstract. It is not

divorced from actually existing systems in the process of unprecedented

global change. The impact of sustained urbanization, demographic

movement, intercultural communities and increased stratification is

profound and will condition the forms and nature of innovation produced in

globalized contexts.

Globalization and the altered relationships that emerge from the

globalization process therefore influence innovation in immediate and direct

ways. It also shapes the nature of the learning response to innovation. It is

one thing to create learning systems and methods that are innovative. It is

another thing to shape, sustain, own and develop them in innovative ways

over a period of time. In that context we have given consideration to forms

of learning and the development of learning communities which, in the right

circumstances, can help to ensure that the fruits of innovation are

meaningful to individuals and to communities and is structured in such a

way that equity, justice, participation and rights are served most efficiently.

The creation of a participative and democratic learning environment has not

been to the forefront in traditional discourse surrounding innovation. In fact,

the discussion on innovation and creativity has been increasingly

conditioned by images derived from free market liberalism and from the

sense of competitive pressures. The recent global economic crisis may

provide a welcome opportunity to re-locate innovation in the context of

community and shared ownership where values have equal importance with

rates of profitable extraction.

It is in that sense that innovation is re-imagined. An innovation that is more

than the sum of its parts. An innovation that responds as well as forges new

learning and new products. An innovation that takes risks and is not

circumscribed by narrow policy barriers. An innovation that is not a panacea

for current ills, but rather a mode of thinking, acting and doing that has at

63

its heart the transformation of relationships and conditions in our globalized

world.

64

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES

Adams, K. (2005). Sources of Innovation and Creativity: A Summary of the

Research, National Center on Education and the Economy.

http://skillscommission.org/commissioned.htm.

Alonso, MJ., Arandia, M. y Loza, M. (2008). “La tertulia como estrategia

metodológica en la formación continua: avanzando en las dinámicas

dialógicas” (“The chatting gathering as a methodological strategy in in-

service learning: moving along dialogical dynamics”). Revista

electrónica interuniversitaria de formación del profesorado, ISSN 1575-

0965, Vol. 11, Nº. 1.

Amabile, Teresa (1996). Creativity In Context: Update to the Social

Psychology of Creativity. Westview Press.

Amabile, T. M.; Conti, R.; Coon, H.; Lazenby, J.; Herron, M. (1996).

“Assessing the Work Environment for Creativity”. The Academy of

Management Journal, 39 (5), 1154-1184.

Apple, M.W. y Beane, J.A. (1995). Escuelas democráticas. Madrid: Morata.

Argyle, M. and P. Trower (1979). Person to person: ways of communicating.

London: Harper and Row.

Aubert, A.; Flecha, A.; García, C.; Flecha, R.; Racionero, S. (2008).

Aprendizaje dialógico en la sociedad de la información. Barcelona:

Hipatia.

Aubert, A.; Duque, E.; Fisas, M.; Valls, R. (2004). Dialogar y transformar.

Pedagogía crítica del siglo XXI. Barcelona: Graó.

Austin, J.L. (1971). Como hacer cosas con palabras : palabras y acciones.

Buenos Aires: Paidós.

65

Avis, J. (2002). “Social Capital, Collective Intelligence and Expansive

Learning: Thinking through the Connections. Education and the

Economy”. British Journal of Educational Studies, Volume 50, Number

3, September 2002 , pp. 308-326(19).

Bateson, G. (1985). Pasos hacia una ecología de la mente. Buenos Aires:

Carlos Lohlé.

Beck, U.; Giddens, A.; Lash, S. (1997). Modernización reflexiva. Política,

transición y estética en el orden social moderno. Barcelona: Península.

Beck, U. (1998). La sociedad del riesgo: hacia una nueva modernidad.

Barcelona: Paidós.

Bell, D. (1976). El advenimiento de la sociedad post-industrial: un intento

de prógnosis social. Madrid: Alianza Editorial.

Boland, R. (Ed.), Managing as designing. Stanford: Stanford University

Press.

Braverman, H. (1974). Labor and Monopoly Capital. New York: Monthly

Review Press.

Bruner, J.S. (1988). Desarrollo cognitivo y educación. Madrid: Morata.

Bruner, J.S. (1996). Realidad mental y mundos posibles. Los actos de la

imaginación que dan sentido a la experiencia. Madrid: Morata.

Bruner, J.S. (2000). La educación puerta de la cultura. Madrid: Visor.

Bruce, Alan. (2009). Beyond Barriers: Intercultural Learning and Inclusion

in Globalized Paradigms. EDEN: Lisbon.

Bruce, A. and Hartnett, T., (2005). Community Based Learning via Learning

Communities: a joint U.S. - Irish Perspective, Dipoli DKK: Helsinki.

Carneiro, R. (2007). “The Big picture: understanding learning and meta-

learning challenges”. European Journal of Education, Vol.42, No. 2.

Carr, W (1990). Hacia una ciencia crítica de la educación. Barcelona:

Laertes.

66

Castells, M. (1997). La era de la información: economía, sociedad y cultura.

Madrid: Alianza.

Castells, M. (2001). La galaxia internet. Reflexiones sobre Internet,

empresa y sociedad. Madrid: Areté.

CEDEFOP (2008). Terminology of European education and training policy: A

selection of 100 key terms. Luxembourg, Office for Official Publications

of the European Communities.

Chan Kim; W & and Mauborge, Renée: (2005). Blue Ocean Strategy: How

to Create Uncontested Market Space and Make Competition Irrelevant.

Clark, Barbara (2008). Growing Up Gifted: Developing the Potential of

Children at Home and at School. Prentice Hall. 7th edition.

Craft, A. 2003. “The Limits to Creativity in Education: Dilemmas for the

Educator”. British Journal of Educational Studies, Vol.51, nº 2, pp 113-

127.

CREA (2003-2005). Teorías y sociedades dialógicas. Nuevas transferencias

ciencia-sociedad en la era del conocimiento. Plan nacional de

Investigación Científica, Desarrollo e Innovación Tecnológica, 200-

2003. Ministerio de Ciencia y Tecnología

CREA (2006-2011). INCLUD-ED. Strategies for Inclusion and Social

Cohesion from Education in Europe, FP6 028603-2. Sixth Framework

Programme. Priority 7 Citizens and Governance in a Knowledge-based

Society.. European Commission.

Cummins, J. (2002). Lenguaje, poder y pedagogía. Madrid: Morata.

Csikszentmihaly, Mihaly (2003). Fluir en los negocios: liderazgo y creación

en el mundo de la empresa. Edit. Kairós.

Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of

Discovery and Invention, New York: HarperPerennial. Harvard Business

School Press.

Chomsky, N. (1977). El lenguaje y el entendimiento. Barcelona: Seix Barral.

Chomsky, N. (1988). La quinta libertad. Barcelona:Crítica..

67

Chomsky, N. (2001). La (des)educación. Barcelona: Crítica.

Cropley, A. J. and Cropley D. H. (2009). Fostering Creativity: A Diagnostic

Approach for Higher Education and Organisations, Hampton Press,

Cresskill, NJ. Electronic Foundation for Quality in E-learning.

http://www.qualityfoundation.org/ [Accessed 2nd July 2009].

Davis, M. (2006). Planet of Slums. New York: Verso.

Engeström, Y. & Escalamnte, V. (1995). “Mundane tool or object of

affection? The rise and fall of postal buddy”. In: B. Nardi (Ed.). Activity

Theory and Human-computer Interaction, pp. 325 -373, Cambridge,

MA: MIT Press.

Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by Expanding. An Activity Theoretical

Approach to Developmental Research. Orienta Konsultit: Helsinki.

Engeström, Y. (2004). Managing as argumentative history-making. In R.

Boland (Ed.), Managing as designing. Stanford: Stanford University

Press.

Eisentein, E. (1979): The printing press as an agent of change.

Communications and cultural transformation in early modern Europe.

Cambridge University press.

Etzioni, A. (1993). The Spirit of Community: Rights, Responsibility, and the

Communitarian Agenda. New York: Crown.

European Commission. (2006). Implementing the Community Lisbon

Programme. Proposal for a Recommendation of the European

Parliament and of the Councilon the establishment of the European

qualifications framework for lifelong learning (presented by the

Commission). Luxembourg: Publications Office,

http://ec.europa.eu/education/policies/educ/eqf/com_2006_0479_en.p

df

Ewell, P. (Summer, 1994). Restoring Our Links with Society: The Neglected

Art of Collective Responsibility. Metropolitan Universities, 5(1), 79-87.

68

Fagerberg, Jan (2003). Innovation: A Guide to the Literature. Centre for

Technology, Innovation and Culture. University of Oslo

http://folk.uio.no/janf/downloadable_papers/03fagerberg_innovation_

ottawa.pdf

Fernández, I. y Arandia, M (2003). Hezkuntzako ikerkuntza partaidetzaren

ikuspegitik: errealitatea pentsatuz eta eraikiz. Bilbo: Udako Euskal

Unibertsitatea.

Figuerdo, A. (2009). Innovating in Education: Educating for Innovation,

EDEN Research Workshop, Porto.

Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogía del oprimido. Madrid: Siglo XXI.

Freire, P. (1990). La naturaleza política de la educación. Barcelona. Paidós.

Freire, P. (1994). Cartas a quien pretende enseñar. Madrid: Siglo XXI.

Freire, P. (1997). A la Sombra de este Árbol. Barcelona. El Roure.

Fuentes, C. & Torbay, A. (2004). “Desarrollar la creatividad desde los

contextos educativos: un marco de reflexión sobre la mejora socio-

personal”, REICE, Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana sobre Calidad,

Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, vol. 2, nº1.

Gadotti M. et al. (2003). Perspectivas actuales de la educación. Siglo XXI.

Buenos Aires.

Gardner, Howard (2007). Las cinco mentes del futuro. Edit. Barcelona:

Paidós.

Gardner, Howard (1993). Inteligencias múltiples. La teoría en la práctica.

Barcelona: Paidós.

Gardner, Howard (1984). Art, Mind & Brain: A Cognitive Approach to

Creativity. Basic Books.

Gardner, Howard; Csikszentmilahy; Mihlay; Damon, William (2002). Buen

trabajo. Cuando ética y excelencia convergen. Barcelona: Edit. Paidós.

Giddens, A. (1995). Modernidad e identidad del yo. Barcelona: Península.

69

Giddens, A. (1998). La tercera vía: la renovación de la socialdemocracia.

Madrid: Taurus.

Goodlad, J.L. (1997). In Praise of Education. New York: Teachers College

Press.

Goody, J. (1990): The Logic of Writing and the Organization of Society.

Cambridge University Press.

Graff, H.J. (1979): The Literacy Myth. Literacy and Social Structure in the

Nineteenth Century City. New York: Academic Press.

Guilford, J. P. (1950). “Creativity Research: Past, present, and future”.

American Psychologist, 5: 444-454.

Habermas, J. (1987). Teoría de la acción comunicativa .Vo l . I y II. Madrid:

Taurus ( v. o. en 1981).

Hämäläinen, (2005). Structural Adjustment and Social Innovations: The

New Challange for Innovation Policies. (www.sitra.fi).

Hamalainen, T. J. and R. Heiskala (2007). Social Innovations, Institutional

Change and Economic Performance: Making Sense of Structural

Adjustment Processes in Industrial Sectors, Regions and Societies,

Cheltenham, Edward Elgar.

Hargreaves, A. (2003). Enseñar en la sociedad del conocimiento. Barcelona:

Octaedro.

Illich, I. (1974). La sociedad desescolarizada. Barcelona: Barral.

[Deschooling society, 1971]

Jaussi, M.L. (2002): Comunidades de aprendizaje en Euskadi. Vitoria:

Publicaciones del Gobierno Vasco.

Jeffrey, B. & Craft, A. (2001). “The Universalization of Creativity” in

Creativity in education. Continuum International Publishing Group.

Kanter, R.M. (1988). "When a thousand flowers bloom: structural,

collective, and social conditions for innovation in organizations", in

Staw, B.M., Cummings, L.L. (Eds),Research in Organizational Behavior,

JAI Press, Greenwich, CT, Vol. Vol. 10 pp.97-102.

70

Lambert, P. (2003). Promoting Developmental Transfer in Vocational

Teacher Education. In Terttu Tuomi-Gröhn and Yrjö Engeström (Eds.),

Between School and Work. New Perspectives on Transfer and

Boundary-crossing (pp. 233-253).Amsterdam-Boston-London-New

York-Oxford-Paris-san Diego-San Francisco-Singapore-Sydney-Tokio:

Elsevier Science.

Loogma, Krista (2004). Töökeskkonnas õppimise tähendus töötajate

kohanemisel töömuutustega (Doktoritöö, Tallinna Pedagoogikaülikool)

Tallinn: TPÜ Kirjastus

Lundvall, B.A. & Johnson B. (1994): “The Learning Economy”, Journal of

Industry Studies I (2), 23-42.

Max-Neef, M. (2000). Economía Transdisciplinaria para la sustentabilidad.

(http://www.volpa.org/documentos/max-neef.pdf).

Markkula, M & Sinko, Matti (2009) Knowledge Economies and Innovation

Society Evolve around Learning. Elearningpapers.

http://www.elearningeuropa.info/files/media/media19201.pdf

Miettinen, R. (2006). The Sources of Novelty: a Cultural and Systemic View

of Distributed Creativity. Creativity and Innovation Management 15

(2), 173-181.

Miller, Riel (2003). Future of Tertiary Education. OECD-CERI,

http://www.mext.go.jp/a_menu/kokusai/forum/04022701/004/001.pd

f

Miller, Riel; Shapiro, Hanne and Hilding-Haman, Knud Erik (2008). School´s

Over: Learning Spaces in Europe in 2020: an Imagining Exercise on

the Future of Learning. Joint Research Centre. Scientific and Technical

Report. European Commission. http://ftp.jrc.es/EURdoc/JRC47412.pdf

Morin, Edgard (2003). Educar en al era planetaria. Barcelona: Gedisa.

Mouleart, F.; Martinelli, F.; Swyngedow, E.; Gonzales, S. (2005 -1976-).

“Towards Alternative Model(s) of Local Innovation”. Urban Studies, Vol

42, No 11, 1969-1990.

71

Mulgan, G. (2006). The Process of Social Innovation.

http://www.policyinnovations.org/ideas/policy_library/data/TheProcess

ofSocialInnovation/_res/id=sa_File1/INNOV0102_p145162_mulgan.pdf

Mulgan, G. with Tucker, S., Ali. R., Sanders, B. (2007). Social innovation.

What It Is, Why It Matters and How It Can Be Accelerated. Skoll

Centre for Social Entrepreneurship. Working paper,

http://www.youngfoundation.org/files/images/03_07_What_it_is__SAI

D_.pdf

Mumford, M.D. & Gustafson, S. (1998). “Creativity syndrome: Integration,

application and innovation”. Psychological Bulletin, 103, 27-43.

Mumford, M.D. (2002). “Social Innovation: Ten Cases From Benjamin

Franklin”, Creativity Research Journal, 14 (2), 253-266.

Mumford, M.D.; Moertl, P. (2003). “Cases of Social Innovation: Lessons

From Two Innovations in the 20th Century”. Creativity Research

Journal, Vol 15, No. 2 & 3, 261-166.

Nardi, B. (Ed.). Activity Theory and Human-computer Interaction, pp. 325 -

373, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

OECD (2005). Manual de Oslo: Guía para la recogida e interpretación de

datos sobre innovación. http://www.conacyt.gob.sv/Indicadores

%20Sector%20Academcio/Manual_de_Oslo%2005.pdf)

OECD (2001) The well-being of nations: the role of human and social

capital. Paris: OECD

Pascarella, E.T., & Terenzini, P.T. (2005). How college affects students: A

third decade of research, Volume 2. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Perry-Smith, Jill E.; Shalley, Christina E. (2003). “The Social Side of

Creativity: A Static and Dynamic Social Network Perspective”. The

Academy of Management Review, 28 (1), 89-106.

Piirto, J. (2004). Understanding Creativity, Scottsdale, Arizona: Great

Potential Press.

72

Posner, P. (2009) The Pracademic: An agenda for re-engaging practitioners

and academics. George Washington University. www.maxwell.syr.edu/

pa/minnowbrook3/PDF%20Files/Phase%20II%20Papers/Posner%20-

%20The%20Pracademic.pdf

Reimer, E. (1976). La escuela ha muerto. Barcelona: Barral. [School is

dead, 1970].

Richards, R. (2007). Introduction. In: R. Richards (ed.) Everyday Creativity

and New Views of Human Nature: Psychological, Social and Spiritual

Perspectives, Washington: American Psychological Association.

Rogoff, B. (1993). Aprendices del pensamiento. El desarrollo cognitivo en el

contexto social. Barcelona: Paidós.

Rogoff et al (2001). Learning together: Children and Adults in a School

Community. New York: Oxford University Press.

Runco, M. & Nemiro, J. (1994). “Problem finding, creativity, and

giftedness”. Roeper Reviwe, 16(4), 235-242.

Runco, M. (2009). The Dialectical Evolution of Divergent Thinking Tests

Brussels. http://ec.europa.eu/education/lifelong-learning-

policy/doc/creativity/runco.pdf [Accessed 2nd July 2009]

Salinas, J. (2003). Comunidades Virtuales y Aprendizaje Digital.

http://gte.uib.es/publicacions/comunica/edutec03/salinas_cv.pdf

Säljö, R. (2003). Epilogue: From Transfer to Boundary-crossing. Teoses:

Terttu Tuomi_Gröhn and Yrjö Engeström (Toim.). Between School and

Work. New Perspectives on Transfer and Boundary-crossing.

Amsterdam-Boston-London-NY-Oxford-Paris-San Diego-San Francisco-

Singapore-Sidney-Tokio: Elsevier.

Sanz, F. (2006). El aprendizaje fuera de la escuela. Tradición del pasado y

desafío para el futuro. Madrid: Ediciones Académicas.

Sawyer, R. K.(2006). Explaining Creativity. The Science of Human

Innovation. New York: Oxford University Press.

73

Scardamalia, M. and Bereiter, C. (2006). FCL and Knowledge Building: A

Continuing Dialogue

http://www.ikit.org/fulltext/AnnBrownOct10.06.pdf

Schienstock, G.; Hämäläinen, T. (2001) “Transformation of the Finnish

innovation system: A network approach”. Sitra Reports series 7.

Helsinki: Hakapaino OY.

Scott, S.G., Bruce, R.A. (1994). "Determinants of innovative behavior: a

path model of individual innovation in the workplace", Academy of

Management Journal, Vol. 37 No.3, pp.580-607.

Searle, J. & Soler, M. (2004). Lenguaje y ciencias sociales. Diálogo entre

John Searle y CREA. Barcelona: El Roure.

Searle, J. R. (1980) Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain

Sciences 3 (3): 417-457.

Sen, Amartya (1999): Desarrollo y libertad. Planeta. Barcelona.

Sepúlveda, G. (2001). ¿Qué es aprendizaje expansivo?

http://www.innovemosdoc.cl/publicaciones/Diversidad.pdf

Simonton, D. (2000). "Creativity: cognitive, personal, developmental and

social aspects." American Psychologist 55(1): 151-158.

SITRA (2005). Making Finland a leading country in innovation. Innovation

Programme. 2005. Helsinki: SITRA

Spinosa, C. et al (1997): Disclosing new worlds –Entrepeneurship,

democratic action and cultivation of solidarity. The Mit Press,

Cambridge Mass.

Sternberg, R.J. (ed) (1999). Handbook of Creativity, Cambridge, New York,

Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town, Singapore, São Paolo: Cambridge

University Press, 10th edition 2007.

Sternberg, R.J. (2003/2007). Wisdom, Intelligence, and Creativity

Synthesized, Cambridge, New York, Melbourne, Madrid, Cape Town,

Singapore, São Paolo, Delhi: Cambridge University Press.

74

Sternberg, R.J. & Lubart, T.I. (1993). Investing in creativity. Psychological

Inquiry, 4(3), 229-232.

Sternberg, R.J. & Lubart, T.I. (1997). La creatividad en una cultura

conformista. Barcelona: Paidos.

Sternberg et al (ed) (2004). Creativity. From Potential to Realization.

Washington. American Psychological Association.

Taddei, Fracois (2009) Training Creative and Collaborative Knowledge-

builders: a Major Challenge for 21st century Education. Centre de

Reserches Interdisciplinaires. Faculté de Medecine Paris Descartes.

http://q.liberation.fr/pdf/20090414/10901_telechargez-le-rapport.pdf

Tinto, V. (1995). Learning communities, collaborative learning, and the

pedagogy of educational citizenship. AAHE Bulletin. 47, 11-13.

Torres, R.M. (2004). Comunidad de aprendizaje. La educación en función

del desarrollo local y del aprendizaje. http://www.udlap.mx/rsu/pdf/1/

RepensandoloEducativodesdeelDesarrolloLocal.pdf

Tuomi, I. (2002). Networks of Innovation. Change and Meaning in the Age

of the Internet, Oxford University Press.

Tuomi-Gröhn, T. (2003). Developmental Transfer as Goal of Internship in

Practical Nursing. Teoses: Terttu Tuomi-Gröhn and Yrjö Engeström

(Toim.) Between School and Work. New Perspectives on Transfer and

Boundary-crossing. Amsterdam-Boston-London-NY-Oxford-Paris-San

Diego- San Francisco- Singapore- Sidney-Tokio, Elsevier.

Unsworth, K. (2001) “Unpacking Creativity”. The Academy of Management

Review, 26 (2), 289-297.

Van de Ven, A.H. (1986). Central Problems in the Management of

Innovation. Management Science, Vol. 32, No. 5. pp. 590-607.

Veblen, T. (2006). The Instinct of Workmanship and the State of the

Industrial Arts. New York: Cosimo.

Von Hippel (2005). Democratizing innovation. http://web.mit.edu/evhippel/

www/democ1.htm.

75

Vigotsky, L. (1995). Pensamiento y lenguaje. Barcelona: Paidós.

Vigotsky, L. (2006). Teoría de las emociones. Madrid: Akal.

Villalba, Ernesto (2008): On Creativity. Towards an Understanding of

Creativity and its Measurements. JRC

(http://crell.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Publications/CRELL%20Research

%20Papers/EUR_EVillalba_oncreativity_web.pdf)

Wells, G. (2001). Action, Talk, and Text: Learning and Teaching through

Inquiry. Practitioner Inquiry Series. Teachers College Press, Williston.

West, M.A. & and Farr, J.L. (1990). Innovation and Creativity at Work:

Psychological and Organizational Strategies. Chichester: Wiley.

West, M.A. (2002). "Sparkling fountains or stagnant ponds? An integrative

model of creativity and innovation implementation within groups",

Applied Psychology: An International Review, Vol. 51 No.3, pp.355-86.

Woodman, R.W., Sawyer, J.E., Griffin, R.W. (1993). "Toward a theory of

organizational creativity", Academy of Management Review, Vol. 18

pp.293-321.

Young Foundation. (2007). http://www.youngfoundation.org.uk.

Zhao, C.-M. and Kuh, G.D. (2004). Adding value: Learning communities and

student engagement. Research in Higher Education, 45(2), 115-138.

76

PART 2.

Identification of the

Best Practices.BPRecord Tool

Summary Table of Best Practices

77

BPRecordIn this questionnaire best practice refers to a method or process which promotes

creativity and/or produces innovations.

Background information:

Country:

Information collected by:

Name:

Organisation:

Role/Title:

Address:

E-mail:

Telephone:

Fax:

Web:

Source of information:

Interview

Informant:

Name:

Organisation:

Role:

E-mail:

Telephone:

Questionnaire

Informant:

Name:

Organisation:

Role:

E-mail:

Telephone:

Bibliographic References (Report /Journal/Book). According to international convention:

Other:

Target group:

VET Adult VET Working life

Field:

Creative, (which)_____________ Technical (which)__________________

78

1. Training programme/course/project in which creative methods have been applied:

1.1. Name:

1.2. Organisation:

Public sector / Private Sector / Other

1.3. Contact information:

Address:

E-mail:

Telephone:

Fax:

Web:

1.4. Number of participants:

Learners:

Trainers:

Others, who?

1.5. Approximate age division of participants (specifying age related to social situation, e.g.: schooling, employment/unemployment, social exclusion situation, etc.)

1.6. Duration of the experience:

Project start-up:

Current situation (underway, finished, others):

1.7. Source of financing (Institution’s budget, specific funding for the project, others).

1.8. Objectives of the practice:

1.9. Main contents:

2. Main reason to consider this example as a best practice?

3. Are skills of creativity (creative competences) defined in the programme/ course / project?

If yes:

Which?

4. What kinds of creative methods were applied in the programme/course/project?

5. How have methods supporting creativity been developed?

6. Why was it developed?

7. What was new and different in this training/course/project compared to previous implementations of the same/similar trainings/courses/projects?

8. Were there new innovations generated as a result of the used creative methods?

If yes:

What kinds of innovations?

How was the innovation recognized? (how can it be called/defined as an innovation?)

How can it be said that it was the creative method that generated the innovation?

Were creative methods used particularly to promote innovation or

79

could the innovations be generated without the method?

9. In addition to the methods used, were there particular elements identified in the circumstances where the training /course/ project was held?

If yes:

What kinds?

Which eventual supports or equipments were used?

10. Were specific competences defined for trainers in order to carry out this training/course/project?

If yes:

Which?

Was any additional training required to develop these competences?

11. What was the impact of the used method on:

1. Participant’s motivation?

2. Learning results?

3. Other?

12. How was the training assessed?

1. By whom?

2. When?

3. What were the assessment instruments?

13. Which aspects of the used method were most valued by the participants?

14. Has the method been disseminated?

If yes:

How?

Where?

15. Has the method been implemented in other contexts?

If yes:

Where?

Were the results positive?

80

2. Summary Table of BPsThis table of BPs incorporates the central elements identified during the first phase of the CREANOVA project. The aims of the table are: 1) to help navigating in the large amount of data provided in BPRecords and BP reports and 2) serve as a tool when selecting a best practice for experiments

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

1 ITA“Sharing is the method” Adult VET T/C

Training course (on documentary film-making)

3 years

SHARING is the method and basis of the learning process, incl. discussions, involvement, participatory projects, testing, bringing out ideas, autonomy, responsibility, telling with fear, community training, exchange of ideas etc.

Improvement in students’ learning results

Creation of new industries and companies on the field by graduates

* Freedom

* Sharing ideas with international professionals and students

* Responsibility

* Support for film projects

* Tri-lingual training

* Flexible structures and curricula

* Melding of theoretical principles and hands-on experience

2 ITA“Course for managers of Innovation”

Adult VET / Working life (handicraft businesses)

C

Training course for managers of handicraft businesses (aimed to help in realizing innovative ideas)

5 months, (incl. 40 h classes + 8 h personal coaching)

* Creative methods (incl. holistic method, subconscious process, lateral thinking)

* interactive approach, involvement of students, simulations and guided discussions, learning by doing, ...

Impact on students’ motivation (became aware of their potential)

No new innovative ideas were generated, participants already had an innovative idea

* lateral thinking method

* encouraging people with different background to work together

* no assessment

3 ITA “Learn to learn” VET T

Project (aimed to apply competences to identify innovative solutions for specific needs)

3 years (5 h a week + leisure time)

* Creative methods, incl. lateral thinking and „6 thinking hats”, the TRIZ method and the holistic method;

* Team work: strong personal relationships, all students are at the same level, collaboration, respect, acceptance of other opinions, no competition

*Improvement of oral and written expression

* impact on motivation and learning results

Innovative. products generated

* freedom

* transparency in methods

* relation-ships among various actors

* Constant connection between theory and practice.

4 EST

Web-based training course „Introduction to advertising: creativity with borders and game with rules”

Adult VET / VET

C

100% web-based training course (aimed to develop creativity of a learner in the context of advertising training)

1 semester for VET students and 10 weeks for adult learners (staff of NGOs)

* Web-based course lectures + creative exercises

* exercises ask for individual thinking, not reproduction of theoretical knowledge acquired

* individual feedback, no traditional assessment by using marks, but written commentaries

* Impact on students’motivation and learning results

Idea of innovative product (reading game) was generated in online discussions

* freedom to choose your study time and select from exercises

* individual thinking promoted

* teacher’s aim to create positive and creative mood

* free communication btw learner and teacher

81

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

5 EST

The course “product development” in Kuressaare Ametikool

VET C

Training course on product development, includes generation of product ideas, product realization and presentation

3 weeks

* brainstorming, lateral thinking, both analytical and associative approaches are used

* free atmosphere, no right and wrong ideas, discussion, reflection

Impact on learners motivation and learning results

Many innov. products have been generated (ancient handicraft work in new forms)

* Students are not producing working samples, but original and innovative products

* By now the course has been incorporated into national curriculum

* Students are not producing working samples, but original and innovative products

* Ecological approach and recycling

* Feed-back from proff artist

6 EST

Creative learning environment in Olustvere Teenindus- ja Maamajanduskool

Adult VET / VET C

Example of creative school environment

* Increasingly many things taught in the context of practical training;

* general subjects integrated into vocational subjects;

* independence and responsibility asked from students, freedom provided in implementing learning tasks

Impact on learners motivation and learning results (very low dropout rate)

No innov. generatedAtmosphere inside of the buildings and outside in the school campus area

* Interwoven training and real work opportunities

7 EST

Practical training of computer networks in VET Centre of Haapsalu

VET T Training course 6 weeks

* Students imitating work of a real company;

* continuous need for solving problems simulated by teachers

* team-work, independence, responsibility is promoted, freedom in problem finding and solving

Impact on learning motivation and learning results

No innov. generated

* freedom,

* authentic learning context

* Authentic learning context

* Teacher’s role as an observer and mentor

* creativity promoted in the context of different school subjects and activities (project weeks)

8 FIN Demola Working life C/T

Project (open innovation environment in order to facilitate innovation project teams)

2 years

* brain-storming, double teams etc.

* social interaction, informal place, communication in an open innovation environment visible to all actors, anyone can contribute

* Raised motivation (possibility to do real things):

* Impact on learning results and skills (learning skills, initiative and inf search)

* ability to act with different people

Many kinds of digital and social innovations has been generated; small enterprises has been set up

Students:

* practical learning envir.

* closer connection to work

* co-operation

Work life:

* ex-perience of open innovation process

* con-nection to talented persons

* right to the designed products

* BP promotes school-company cooperation

* brings together actors from different fields;

* Takes place in informal place away from school in an old building;

82

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

9 FINHOPE project & Fire Souls

Adult VET / Working life C/T

Project (aimed to bring revolutionary change in learning methods and learning environments)

1,5 years

*Learner is in the center

* Learning in untraditional places

* Making a learning agreement with oneself;

* Dialogue, sharing, reflection, reading and meeting with experts

* learner’s responsibility of one’s learning and freedom, mistakes regarded as source of learning

* Positive impact on learners’ motivation and learning results, impact on learners’ creativity

Still under way ?

* Learning in untraditional places

* Social media tools used, incl Youtube, Facebook

10 FIN Varikko- project VET T

Project (individual study plan as a mean for preventing students drop-out)

3,5 years

* Integrating general subjects to voc subjects > learning e.g. Swedish in authentic environment > action learning – learning language while doing practice; The method TPR (Total Physical Response)

* Senior students as mentors to younger ones

* Impact on students’ motivation and learning results

* Drop-oup rate decreased*

Students built an interactive visual tool (board) used in teaching

* Learning from senior students

* Learning outside of class

* Integr. general subjects to voc training

* Learning outside of classroom (real work environment)

11 FIN

The enchantment of an older wooden house- fixing, experiments, creativity

Working life CTraining program 6 c.u.?

* Out-of-school learning

* Experiential learning: living in a village of old houses

* Inventory learning; identifying diff historical issues in the buildings

* Experimenting and workshops

Impact on learners’ motivation and learning results

Some new tools for teaching (puzzle works, miniature models, a CD)

* Concrete-ness

* Designing new models for teaching

* Out-of-school learning envir.

* Promoting integration of subjects

* Experts of the field involved to the training

12 FIN

Training program at Pirkanmaa Educational Consortium

VET TTraining program 4 years

No specific method, but combination of elements which bring creative solutions:

* Individualizing tasks

* Students tutor each-other (senior students tutoring)

* Moodle-based studying and guidance

* Using professional networks as a support in guidance

Impact on learners’ motivation and learning results

Final products made by students at the end of the studies include innov aspects

* Plurality of methods available

* Practice- orientedness

13 FINTraining in Rautaruukki OY Working life T

Workplace learning environment

* Mixing people with different backgrounds and from diff divisions

* Idea contests

? ?

* Atmosphere (safe, enough time, interaction, trust)

* Encouragement by leaders

83

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

14 FIN Entrepreneurship

Adult VET C

Training program on entrepreneurship

1,5 years

* Team-learning

* Learning in non-formal contexts ( country-side resorts, by the lake)

Impact on learners’ motivation and learning results

Taidosto-cooperative society was established

* exceptional learning environ.

* exceptional learning environment

* safe and secure to express oneself

15 FIN

Training system in Satakunta College of Arts and Crafts

Adult VET C

System applied to carrying out different courses (programs of audio- visual, animator, tv-assistant, movie-assistant)

The process started in 2000

Method/system/philosophy includes following aspects:

* emphasis on constant doing

* offering continuous positive feed-back

* students encouraged to take risks

* No hierarchical relations to students

* Doing things in different ways is encouraged

Impact on learners’

motivation, learning results and professional development

Innovations (new kind of videos) produced

* Free atmosphere

* Possibility to influence one’s own studies

* Learning environment open as possible

* Pulling down the hierarchies

* Raising students’ point of view in the center

16 FIN Entrepreneur-course

VET C Training course 2-3 months

* goal mind-map

* internet-based learning envir.

* discussions

* networking

* success-story analysis

* Impact on learners’ motivation and learning results.

* Developed initiative and learners’ independence

Innovative products generated (e.g. felted woolen yoga-mat, a felted light etc.)

* Freedom

* possibility to influence what one wants to study * presence of Taidosto cooperative society

* the presence of Taidosto-cooperative society

* Open atmosphere

17 FINTIP TOP- Toolbox student mobility project

VET C

Mobility project where several Finnish schools are partners (integrating creative thinking and entrepreneurship into voc studies)

2 years project; second project on-going

* Being in international atmosphere and real organizations

* mixed teams (diff org and fields)

* virtual social cooperative

* holistic approach to well-being

* entrepreneurial approach

* lot of support and guidance

* Impact on students motivation and learning results

*Growth of students individuality, networks and self-esteem

* Innovative business ideas The whole project

* international period used for creating business ideas

18 FIN

Labor-intensive training experiment/ Construction

VET T

Training project: practice-oriented training experiment

3 years (on-going)

* Learning by doing emphasized

* lots of guidance

* immediate feedback

* Practice diaries filled in on a daily basis

* Impact on learners motivation and learning results (hand-based skills, ability to plan one’s work

* Minimal absent rates

* Some innovative solutions

* learning in authentic context

* social network

* possibility of doing

* Work-practice in different workplaces as a dominant element

84

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

19 BAS Publicity campaign

Working life C

Publicity campaign (in order to change the image of VET in society)

3 months

* strategic analysis

* lateral thinking

* experimentation with new technologies (e.g. mobile marketing)

No innovations generated

20 BAS Bizkaiacreativa Working life C

Training course led by David Parrish (aimed to foster entrepreneurial spirit)

3 days* Impact on learners motivation and learning results

* Clarity

* organization

Aspects emphasized:

* need to anticipate changed, not just react them

* threats can be turned into opportunities

21 BAS

“Guidance for the search and improvement of employment of people over 45 years in the district of Debabarrena: the value of the age”

Adult VET Educ.

Project (aimed to provide training for unemployed people over 45 years )

6 months

* music therapy techniques (Bonny Method of Guided Image and Music)

* coaching (participants discussing their lives as they deserved to be lived)

? ? ? -

22.

BAS

Development of personal resources and purchasing personal and social habits for employment

Adult VET Educ.

Project aimed to provide training for unemployed people (among immigrants, people with disabilities, people in rehabilitation process)

7 months

Coaching techniques:

* creative communication: verbal and non-verbal

* initiative, autonomy and pro-activity

* decision making and problem solving attitude

* motivation

* self-reflection

* using role-plays, visualization, lists of strengths and weaknesses etc

Improvement of participant motivation, social skills and higher work values

No direct innovations generated, but the approach itself is innovative

* atmosphere created to work

* Being considered as active agents, as individual

-

23 BAS

Program for Prevention and Social Integration

Adult VET Educ.

Training program for people with risk of social exclusion and difficulties in integration (low-skilled, unemployed and people with mental disorders and addictions

5 months

* Theatrical techniques based on “the game”

* Role-playing, simulation games and viewing movies

* Visits to book fairs, libraries and adult schools

* paperwork and questionnaires filled in for making entries in different entities

Impact on participants’ motivation and improvement of social and personal skills

No direct innovations generated, but the approach was innovative

* Possibility of creative and interpretative work

* Freedom

In order participants could reconcile family life and attending the program the Social service gave a grant in order to provide childcare facilities, school meals and day center

85

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

24 BASEmpresa Joven Educativa VET T

A project (activities concentrating on AGOPE module (management and Administration of Small Establishments) aiming to develop initiative, creativity and entrepreneurial capabilities

A school year (incl 90 hours of training)

* Methodology includes all steps of creative process: the conception of an idea, creation of the catalogue, sales techniques

* imposing active attitude of the students towards knowledge

* Impact on learners’ motivation * theoretical skills and application of skills into real-life situations

* Stronger capacity to carry out initiatives

Innovative products developed (e.g. assembling computers of recycled materials)

* Forming part of the teaching process

* Methodological approach

A project currently underway in 40 centres

25 BAS Interciclos VET? C

Production of audiovisual materials using various multimedia techniques

An academic year

* brainstorming

* team-work in teams comprised of specific professional profiles

* Impact on teachers and learners motivation

* Increase in participants self-esteem

No direct innovations were produced, but the approach itself is innovative

* opportunity to work under conditions similar to real job market

* Favorable atmosphere where initiatives may emerge and develop

26 BAS KREA EiTB Adult VETEduc.

Ent.

Project aimed to develop a process and a method for creating practical creativity spaces

4 years (underway)

* 6 hats technique

* creating an internal network of facilitators of creativity (management team, a talent manager, a drive (15 professionals from EiTB)

Useful for internal clients and have became a reference for other companies

?An online creativity course has been developer -

27 BASGIGA (Gaitasun Industrialak Garatzen)

Working life T

Project aimed to promote innovation in SMEs (implementation of services, Job Training catalogue, seminars, development of proff profile of Technical Process Trainer

4 years (underway)

* Problem solving

* Trial and error experiments etc

* Impact on motivation

* Impact in new companies attracted to the project

Yes, two companies opened up new lines of businesses

* The relationship with the technical staff of the companies

* Ability to present proposals

-

28 BAS

Modelo avanzado de gestion en la formacion profesional

Centers of Vocational Training

T

Project aimed to establish and apply a model of transformation for the Centers of Vocational Training (Guneka model)

4 years

* creation of self-managing teams

* generation of ideas to face challenges

* outlining ideas by teams

* imagination by means of creative groups

* using what-how matrix in the implementation of objectives

* cooperative learning

* diversification of learning methods used in VET Centres

Organizational and cultural change

* permanent framework established

* investment in capacity and time

* organization of the Centre into independent units

* association btw objectives, training needs and development

Collaboration with businesses in the design and elaboration of didactic and technological projects

86

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

29 BASBelkoian Project (Problem Based Learning)

VET Meth.

Project aimed to implement a work method in the classroom where the learner plays an active role in his/her learning process

7 years (underway)

* The creative SORMEN-CREA method which develops creativity through a problem solving process known by IDEAL

* Use of problem-solving tool that encourage disperse thought

* teamwork

* teacher’s role as tutor or expert

Impact on participants’ motivation

New learning-teaching methodology as innovation

* teamwork

* opportunity to organize one’s time

* support of teachers

* learning aspects not directly related to the material

30 BASPROYECTO MLS (Problem Based Learning)1

VET Meth.

Project aimed to implement a work method in the classroom where the learner plays an active role in his/her learning process

7 years (underway)

* The SORMEN-CREA method which develops creativity through a problem solving process known by IDEAL

* Use of problem-solving tool that encourage disperse thought

* teamwork

* teacher’s role as tutor or expert

Impact on participants’ motivation

?

* teamwork

* opportunity to organize one’s time

* support of teachers

* learning aspects not directly related to the material

31 BASDiffusion of entrepreneurial culture

VET Educ.

Project aimed to promote entrepreneur culture by: a) initial training; b)additional training; c) implementation of mobility projects; c)implementation of Innovative Business Center in Audiovisual field

2-3 years (throughout the last year of VET training (repeated every year)

* development and realization of business plans, encouraging introspection, inner world , curious mind and lateral thinking

? ? ?

32 GBRFind Your Talent programme

VET C

A programme piloting 5 hours (in and out of school) of culture per week building on the national curriculum and work of the Government’s creative education project “Creative Partnerships”

?

* gives children and young people the chance to try out different cultural and creative activities

? ? ?

Emphasis on the role culture can play in improving social, economic and environmental well-being of communities

1 Same information presented in the BPRecord as for the Belkoian Project

87

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

33 GBR14-25 Academic Hub

VET / Adult VET C

The 14-25 Academic Hub supports collaboration between University of the Art London, several secondary schools and further education collages.

?

* sharing curriculum and facilities by schools, collages and universities, sharing e-learning materials

* students interchange through mentoring

* sharing industry and community contacts

Example of many events – “Enslaved” fashion-show in co-operation with fashion professionals

? ? ? -

34 GBRTyneside Cinema Adult VET C

Learning Engagement and Development opportunities for children, young people, schools, colleges, individuals and businesses (courses, projects, events)

Since 1937, variety of courses, from 1 week long to 1 year long projects

* screening and film-making projects

* industry events, introducing pupils to the professional film world

* Inset sessions on using film and the moving image in the classroom

? ? ?

35 GBRCultural Leadership Programme

VET / Adult VET / Working life

C

Programme seeks to benefit the wider creative and cultural sector (advertising, design, historic environment etc) by providing support and development for leaders in the sector

?* e.g. Practitioner Leadership Development Placements

? ? ?

36 GBR

Sorrell Foundation Young Design Programme

VET C

Programme aimed to develop pupils’ and students’ life skills

6- year programme (underway)

* Pupils work in teams to create a brief for a design project that will improve the quality of life in their school

* Pupils as clients are assisted by university students and professional designers or architects

* Essential skills as teamwork, problem-solving and communication are learned

* Impact on skills development (communication, teamwork, negotiation and problem-solving)

* awareness of what FE and HE can offer

* raise of self-esteem

* unique design conceptsEncouraging real life experience of the cycle of design project

88

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

37 GBRTrain to Gain Service

VET / Adult VET / Working life

C

Programme helps to plan the workforce development of organizations, collages, universities, training providers etc.

4 years (underway)

* “Train to Gain” broker assessing the training needs of organizations

* better skills of workforce

* improved long-term competitiveness of organizations

?* 78% of employers happy with skills brokerage services

Advice on the best training + training subsidies and wage compensation

38 GBR Whitehall Innovation Hub

VET C

Whitehall Innovation Hub aims supporting innovative thinking and practice across Whitehall

Started in 2008

* Research and consultancy work

* network formation

* active learning events for departmental leaders

* corporate mechanisms that help incentivise innovation

* impact on skills development

*creation of innovations (virtual school) ? -

39 GBRFlanders District of Creativity

VET C

FlandersDC is an initiative consisting of several projects aimed to support entrepreneurial creativity

* Flanders DC fellows – entrepreneurs telling their inspiring stories in schools or events

* GPS ( brainstorming method) for Entreprises

* SAP Lounge – entrepreneurial creativity day

* Annual conference on entrepreneurial creativity etc

* impact on entrepreneurial creativity ? ? -

40 GBREdinburgh International Festival

Working life C

EIF aimed to promote cultural, educational and economic well-being of the people of Edinburg and Scotland.( a year round programme of education and outreach work

Founded in 1947

* Art Practitioner Summer School

* Young Critics programme

* several workshops and seminars

? ? ? -

41 GBR

The Stephen Lawrence Centre/ Stephen Lawrence Trust

VET C

Centre/Trust aimed researching ways to identify gifted or talented individuals in voc learning

Trust established in 1998

* Inspirational lectures presented in schools

* under- and postgraduate bursaries and student scholarships awarded

* advisement of government departments and businesses working in the built environment sector

? ? ?

Mission: Advancement of social justice and relief of poverty by removal of barriers to ed achievements and employability

89

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

42 GBR

The Prince’s Trust (The Business Programme)

VET C

Programme aimed to help people to explore and test their business ideas, write business plans and start their own businesses or achieve alternative goals in training or work

Since 1976

* Development of guides covering all aspects of starting a business

* cash awards to help develop employability

* funding to set up community projects

? ? ?

* Working with 14-30 year olds who have struggled at school, have been in care, are long-term unemployed or have been in trouble with the law

43 GBR Urban Learning Space

VET / Adult VET / Working life

C/T

ULS is an innovative learning lab that supports project design, implementation and evaluation on public learning spaces, creativity and multimedia

Since 2005

* Establishment of a network of partners based on education providers and influential public bodies

* Use of creative engagement methods and a range of research tools and methods to gather information needed to design new models for learning

* learning led projects, innovation led projects and event series

? * Innovative tools developed

? -

44 GBR JISC VET

JISC programmes aimed to fund infrastructure, services, innovative projects and studies.

9 years

* innovative use of ICT to support education and research

* managing and funding of more than 200 projects within 15 programmes, 49 services that provide expertise, advice, guidance and resources to address needs of all users in HE and FE

90

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

45 IRLConflicts of Interest Adult VET T

To meet post-conflict, reconciliation and conflict transformation needs of communities affected by State and communal violence in Northern Ireland.

8 weeks

* Use of guest speakers and contributors with direct experience of conflict and/or peace and reconciliation strategies.

* Use of strategic partnerships with government, public and community organizations to compete learning dynamic and facilitate learner driver strategies.

* Use of advanced technologies to incorporate media critical studies in analysis of filmic portrayal of conflict in Northern Ireland.

* Use of structured international comparative analysis and incorporation of peace building interventions.

* Use of innovative learner accreditation systems.

* Cross-referencing of academic and practical examples. Participant contribution is encouraged through use of story-telling and creative outputs – especially photographic and filmic representations of conflict

* Innovative engagement with antagonistic communities with lengthy histories of inter-communal violence and State repression.

* Modular structure is tailored to individual learning needs.

* Delivery method flexible and tailored to adult learning style.

Community linkage, use of film, use of individual testimony, use of international comparative modules

*Strong experiential component.

*Strong focus on self-expression and development of identity

*Additional focus on reconciliation and conflict transformation methodologies used guided creative expression.

*post-war, civil conflict environment.

*Also the course is designed to be used in both jurisdictions on the island of Ireland (Republic and NI).

*It is also designed to incorporate representatives of Roman Catholic and Protestant communities.

*There is a strong emphasis on neutrality and cultural respect for both traditions in the materials, venues, methodologies and modes of delivery.

91

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

46 IRL Mediastacks VETC

Mult.

The aim of the training is to give a variety of media production, facilitation and project management skills to practitioners working face-to-face with young people and to increase their capacity to undertake youth-in-action projects involving digital media. By using the ‘stack’ of media exercises in various arrangements youth workers can ‘tailor’ the media experience based on their knowledge of the young person’s needs, capacity and interests.

2 weeks

The methodology is based on non-formal learning and involves group work, team based tasks and participant led activities. The training focuses in particular on

(1) media techniques developed by Bradog in partnership with the Empower Media Network

(2) process-based group facilitation skills

(3) skills needed to develop projects under Action 1 of the YIA programme.

Strong development into media training and expressive arts for young people that builds on youth-work methods and strategies of community empowerment.

Use of pioneer techniques within a non-formal community-based educational settings.

Digital creative expression, development of products, learning arising from increased competence and technical expertise

* Youth at risk

*It works primarily in a community-based environment, with most activities taking place after school or on the weekend. It practices non-formal learning methodologies throughout all our activities.

*It uses the mediums of sport, arts, digital media, training and cultural exchanges to engage young people. It operates a variety of clubs and drop-in centers which allow young people the opportunity to relax and socialize in a safe and friendly environment

92

No Ctry. Title of BP Target group Field Nature of BP Duration Methods General impact Innovative impact Aspect valued by learners

Special circumstances

47 IRLCultúr – celebrating diversity

Adult VET C

The impact of inward to migration in recent years has been profound.At local level few initiatives were promoted to develop language competence or intercultural contact.Cultúr provide a drop in centre facility for ethnic minorities living in Co. Meath who need advice and information on a range of issues with translation in a number of languages facilitated by both staff and volunteers.

Ongoing

Language training; cultural events; story-telling; capacity building; focus on rights seminars

*Strongly recognized and supported initiative that contributed significantly to the development of integration strategies and techniques for immigrants and their families in Meath.

*Excellent results in terms of Language skills acquisition.

*Spin-off results in terms of cultural and social integration and the creation of an annual inter-cultural family day for immigrants and local communities

Interactive, cross-community engagement, use of cultural devices (music, food, story-telling, language and creative expression skills). Strong backing from statutory agencies.

Language training; information retrieval; intercultural awareness. One-to-one advice and mentoring on integration modalities.

*Cultúr has been strongly supported by local government, the Citizens Information Board, trade unions and migrant and community groups.

*The training requires significant coordination of resources, communities and agencies.

48 IRL

Quality and Learning: project initiatives

Working Life

T

Qual. Syst.

The emphasis has been to create a valuable on-line educational resource centre (for parents, carers, school boards of management, teachers /educators)

ongoing

*Music, story-telling and pottery have all been employed. *Assistive technology

Innovative use of methodologies, techniques and tools within a framework of quality management and knowledge transfer in highly specialized sector (significant physical disability).

*Strong emphasis on total-organization engagement. The strategy was to engage trainers, educational staff, management and families in meeting the needs of diverse learners with significant challenges in terms of disability.

*Innovation was directly dependent on innovative management systems, quality based and referenced to independently assessed needs and outcomes.

* NGO sector

*Assistive technology is critical (context is significant physical disability)

93

PART 3.

Final conclusions

94

FINAL CONCLUSIONS

In this report we have reviewed the meanings surrounding concepts of

creativity and innovation – as shaped by the versatility, dynamism and

change of globalized environments. Those meanings mutate in the sense of

the central place of learning in developed societies. Flexibility, interaction,

interchange, collaboration, inclusion and open communication between

communities are key identified spaces in which creativity and innovation can

be understood. A creative and innovative society is a society ready to learn.

These theoretical key concepts, at the same time, are the root of the

practices that promote creativity and innovation. The analytical

development has led to some conclusions:

1. It is not always easy to differentiate between concepts of creativity and

innovation. Parallel to the universalization of the term creativity, there is

the intermingled (sometimes synonymous) use of innovation,

particularly when applied in the learning context.

2. Creativity is a human ability (with ontological, cognitive and social

bases) to produce new ideas, to solve problems in different ways.

Innovation is the successful response to social needs (including

economic responses to market logic and competitiveness) in terms of

greater equity, sustainability and equal opportunities.

3. During the last 30 years creativity studies have been informed by

systemic theories that regard creativity as a co-function of several

elements, including cognitive skills, personality traits, social, cultural and

historical factors. The current emphasis has shifted to include: ordinary

creativity rather than genius; characterizing rather than measuring; the

social system rather than the individual.

4. Creativity can be related to the ability of a person in the workplace to

meet individual and social human needs, whether basic or related to

higher levels of development, production or learning.

95

5. Creativity is a human ability developed in close interaction with context

and associated with the ability to learn in constantly changing

environments (creative learning). It is a quality attributable to all people

and one that is susceptible to development.

6. This raises questions concerning the extent to which the good practice

examples perceive creativity as:

A quality attributable to all people that can give rise to small

innovations in the immediate environments.

As a process that leads to enormously important inventions for

humanity as a whole.

A continuum.

7. At the end of the day, creativity has become an increasingly important

value, both with respect to individual development and to achieving

professional training and cultural development in a constantly changing

society which demands innovative responses.

8. Factors and conditions that foster the development of creativity are:

pulling down structures / teaching-learning in non-formal, out-of-school

environments / interaction / networking / connections to real-life /

doing, hard work / freedom, allowing experiments and mistakes /

freedom of expression/ open innovation environment / technical &

technological solutions and equipment used in a supporting and versatile

ways / challenge / need / mixing people and expertise / trust / team,

collective / informal interaction/ time/ openness to other persons,

things, environments, realities, experiences.

9. Innovation cannot be reduced to a simple matrix of definitions, norms

and procedures. To do so would be to reduce a complex process of

cognition, design and intentionality to a mere set of procedures which,

given the right environment and circumstances, could be reproduced in

any number of settings. Innovation, at a minimum, involves a radical re-

evaluation of existing circumstances and conditions. It involves asking a

rigorous set of questions that interrogate what the current situation is

and then sets the results against what could (or more intriguingly,

should) be.

96

10. Innovation exists in real environments with strongly established

structures and modes of ownership which may by their nature be

antipathetic to any form of questioning or new thought.

11. Innovation can be conceptualized and generalized as occurring in

four circumstances:

a. Crisis -reaction to severe challenge or urgent needs.

b. Values - a planned approach to enhance socio-economic goals.

c. Profit - the commercialization or added values of a product or

service.

d. System eminence - creative energy deployed to maintain

hierarchical or established systems.

12. Innovation is a concept originally related to the practical application

and development of new ideas in the industrial world with the focus on

boosting competitiveness. However, the development of new

technologies affecting the production, use and distribution of knowledge

combined with the grave socio-economic challenges, raises a parallel

debate on the ultimate aims of innovation.

13. There is a need to de-couple innovation/creativity from the

traditional linear notion of “progress”. We live in multifaceted and

complex times of great contradiction. Innovation may be developed –and

located- in very non traditional places. Innovation itself may be

incremental or disruptive.

14. Innovation that produces social value and that contributes to

economic and human needs is a challenge - if we are to achieve the

development of methodologies to understand how teachers, learners and

workers can collaborate to promote inclusion and common welfare.

15. There is a further diversification of the innovation concept, changing

from one inked to merely private companies’ economic sphere to more

public and social areas (social innovation).

16. Innovation is located in the key framework of contemporary life –

the process of globalization. Globalization powerfully affects all human

relationships and structures. It shapes our very understanding of

knowledge, information, values and power. It is not an abstract. It is not

divorced from actually existing systems in the process of unprecedented

global change. The impact of sustained urbanization, demographic

97

movement, intercultural communities and increased stratification is

profound and will condition the forms and nature of innovation produced

in globalized contexts.

17. Globalization and the altered relationships that emerge from the

globalization process influence innovation in immediate and direct ways.

18. Globalization also shapes the nature of the learning response to

innovation. It is one thing to create learning systems and methods that

are innovative. It is another thing to shape, sustain, own and develop

them in innovative ways over a period of time.

19. The learning experiences which can improve the degree of creativity

residing inside each and every one of us must be defined (taking account

of individual genetic factors, emotional aspects, talent in specific

domains and cognitive and environmental factors).

20. The learning environment, however positive, is profoundly shaped by

the context (national, economic, political and cultural) in which it is

shaped and developed. Innovation is often forged in contexts of common

purpose or threat (such as war or conflict) and not always as a result of

policy initiatives. The current context is shaped by crisis and a

fundamental re-shaping of the socio-economic paradigm not seen since

the 1930s. Unprecedented challenges traditional assumptions of linear

notions of “progress”. Creativity and innovation are now critical to re-

orientate socio-economic priorities.

21. Educational and learning processes must be focused on the training

of the learner as subject (autonomy, awareness, criticism, decision), not

as an object.

22. Creative and innovative learning processes exist within wider

educational conceptions: entrepreneurial formation, education for

sustainable development and global responsibility and intercultural

education.

23. The way learning is understood in today’s world has evolved.

Educational and learning processes must collaborate in the development

of equity and social justice. Educational and learning processes have to

aim to overcome inequalities resulting from the fragmented access to

knowledge. Social spaces, organizations and policies that promote forms

of learning based on cooperation, collaboration and collective creation

98

from different cultural viewpoints have enormous possibilities for

anticipating economic and social change and consolidating human

potential.

24. Learning communities, in the right circumstances, can help to ensure

that innovation outcomes are meaningful to individuals and

communities, structured in such a way that equity, justice, participation

and rights are served most efficiently.

25. The creation of a participative and democratic learning environment

has not been to the forefront in traditional discourse surrounding

innovation. In fact, the discussion on innovation and creativity has been

increasingly conditioned by images derived from free market liberalism

and from the sense of competitive pressures. The recent global economic

crisis may provide a welcome opportunity to re-locate innovation in the

context of community and shared ownership where values have equal

importance with rates of profitable extraction.

26. It is in that sense that innovation is re-imagined. An innovation that

is more than the sum of its parts. An innovation that responds as well as

forges new learning and new products. An innovation that takes risks

and is not circumscribed by narrow policy barriers. An innovation that is

not a panacea for current ills, but rather a mode of thinking, acting and

doing that has at its heart the transformation of relationships and

conditions in our globalized world.

We want to end this report emphasizing that nowadays any orientation

towards change is currently associated with the three major concepts

previously mentioned: Learning, Creativity and Innovation. One of the

challenges we shall face in the next phase of the CREANOVA project is

precisely to detect the best creative and innovative practices that we can

transfer either between countries within the same field of work or between

various areas of intervention.

As a result we have attempted to find broad interpretative categories from

which to integrate the different methods proposed from different theoretical

contributions and practical achievements - and to do so from a transcultural

perspective. To search for these macrocategories allows us to pass from one

99

culture to another. This does not aim to establish cultural hierarchies in

practical analysis but to integrate perspectives. Interpreting and assessing

the creative processes outside specific socio-cultural contexts risks

interpreting creativity hierarchically.

From the literature review carried out four main pedagogical concepts

emerged that help us to understand those educational contexts that

enhance creative and innovative learning. These are:

• Need

• Freedom

• Interaction

• Environment

These concepts embrace most of the key factors emphasized both by the

theoretical work and different best practices. We can see them as

macrocategories to help analysis, selection and transfer of good practices of

creative learning while keeping intact criteria of difference and diversity.

Need is a root from which creative and innovative processes emerge. It can

be understood as: survival, troubleshooting, genesis of problems,

motivation (intrinsic and extrinsic), personal need and a collective need to

create a connection with society.

Freedom is associated with ideas as: transgression, readjustment of rules,

openness, trust, dialogue, elimination of hierarchies, inclusion, challenges,

risk-taking, decision taking, participation, self-management, altruism.

Interaction refers to: communication between teachers and students,

peers, others, and interaction between systems, actors and institutions,

virtual interaction, teamwork, networks.

Environment includes: nature, closed environments, open, virtual

environment, and so on.

100

We propose this model of interpretation as an open and flexible model.

Flexible because its aim is not so much focus on discussing the concepts

with which to associate a given factor or element, but to provide a

framework for interpreting and constructing concrete methodological

proposals. It is open because, although at first we have identified these four

factors, is a scheme open to the incorporation of new categories in the light

of the results of the next phases of our investigation.

101