Skip to main content

Organizational Learning in Innovation Schools

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Educational Innovations Beyond Technology
  • 1134 Accesses

Abstract

In Chap. 6, our aim was to gain some idea of the kinds of school-level characteristics that are most conducive to the implementation and integration of ICT-related pedagogical innovations. We found statistically significant associations between some of these characteristics and dimensions of innovativeness, indicating that contextual (ecological) factors influence the outcomes of innovation processes. However, pedagogical innovations also bring changes to the school ecology, and so can be viewed as processes that stimulate learning across the school as an organization. In this chapter, we look at how the innovation schools were nurturing innovative practices and thereby fostering (sustaining) themselves as learning organizations – as places where everybody in the organization learns and contributes to that learning. More particularly, we looked at whether and how the innovations differed in terms of the nature and focus of the organizational learning involved, as well as the mechanisms through which the organizational learning was being propagated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

     Wenger (1998) refers to the organizational environments that foster teachers’ opportunities to learn new ideas and to try out new practices as “architectures for learning.”

  2. 2.

     The five disciplines are systems thinking, personal mastery, mental models, shared vision, and team learning.

  3. 3.

     The Dalton Plan is an educational concept aiming to achieve a balance between each child’s talents and the needs of the growing community, which embraces a three-part plan that continues to be the structural foundation of a Dalton education – the House, the Assignment, and the Laboratory (“Dalton Plan,” Wikipedia).

  4. 4.

     In Greek mythology, the Argo was the ship on which Jason and the Argonauts sailed from Iolcus to retrieve the Golden Fleece.

References

  • Argyris, C., & Schön, D. A. (1978). Organizational learning: A theory of action perspective. Reading: Addison-Wesley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cash, J. I., & McLeod, P. L. (1985). Managing the introduction of information systems technology in strategically dependent companies. Journal of Management Information Systems, 1(4), 5–23.

    Google Scholar 

  • Crainer, S. (1998). Key management ideas (3rd ed.). London: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • EMB (Education and Manpower Bureau HKSAR). (1998). Information technology for learning in a new era: Five-year strategy 1998/99 to 2002/03. Hong Kong. Retrieved from http://www.edb.gov.hk/FileManager/EN/Content_2309/five%20year%20strategy%2099%20to%2003.zip

  • Fiol, C. M., & Lyles, A. L. (1985). Organizational learning. The Academy of Management Review, 10(4), 803–813.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fishman, B., Marx, R. W., Blumenfeld, P., Krajcik, J., & Soloway, E. (2004). Creating a framework for research on systemic technology innovations. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 13(1), 43–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodman, J. (1994). External change agents and grassroots school reform: Reflections from the field. Journal of Curriculum and Supervision, 9(2), 113–135.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hannan, A., English, S., & Silver, H. (1999). Why innovate? Some preliminary findings from a research project on “Innovations in teaching and learning in higher education. Studies in Higher Education, 24(3), 279–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hendricks-Lee, M. S., Soled, S. W., & Yinger, R. J. (1995). Focus on research sustaining reform through teacher learning. Language Arts, 72(4), 288–292.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hill, P., & Crévola, C. (2003). Organizational learning. In B. Davis & J. West-Burnham (Eds.), Handbook of educational leadership and management (pp. 394–403). London: Pearson Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnston, C., & Caldwell, B. (2001). Leadership and organisational learning in the quest for world class schools. The International Journal of Educational Management, 15(2), 94–101.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Karsten, S., Voncken, E., & Voorthuis, M. (2000). Dutch primary schools and concept of the learning organization. The Learning Organization, 7(3), 145–155.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larsson, P., Löwstedt, J., & Shani, A. B. (2001). IT and the learning organization: Exploring the myths of change. Organizational Development Journal, 19(1), 73–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Leskes, A., Grogan, W. R., Canham, R. P., & O’Brien, J. (2003). Designing institutional change. Liberal Education, 89(1), 32–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lorange, P. (1996). A business school as a learning organization. The Learning Organization, 3(5), 5–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mishra, P., & Koehler, M. J. (2006). Technological pedagogical content knowledge: A framework for teacher knowledge. Teachers College Record, 108, 1017–1054.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owston, R. D. (2003). School context, sustainability and transferability of innovation. In R. B. Kozma (Ed.), Technology, innovation and educational change: A global perspective (pp. 125–161). Eugene: International Society for Technology in Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P. (1990). The fifth discipline: The art and science of the learning organization. New York: Currency Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. (2000). Schools that learn: A fifth discipline fieldbook for educators, parents, and everyone who cares about education. New York: Doubleday.

    Google Scholar 

  • Senge, P., & Käufer, K. H. (2000). Communities of leaders or no leadership at all. In S. Chowdhury (Ed.), Management 21C (pp. 186–204). London: Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, P. G. (1998). Institutional change in uncertain times: Lone ranging is not enough. Studies in Higher Education, 23(3), 269–279.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Watkins, K. E., & Marsick, V. J. (Eds.). (1996). In action: Creating the learning organization. Alexandria: ASTD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wenger, E. (1998). Communities of practice: Learning as a social system. Systems Thinker, 9(5), 1–5.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhao, Y., & Frank, K. (2003). Factors affecting technology uses in schools: An ecological perspective. American Educational Research Journal, 40, 807–840.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Nancy Law .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2011 Springer Science+Business Media, LLC

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Law, N., Yuen, A., Fox, R. (2011). Organizational Learning in Innovation Schools. In: Educational Innovations Beyond Technology. Springer, Boston, MA. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-71148-5_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics