Skip to main content
Log in

Overview of the innovative process and the user

  • Innovations in Learning and Processes of Educational Change
  • Published:
Interchange Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The focus of this overview is on the role of the user (student, teacher, parent) in the process of educational change. In the first section research literature is reviewed by critically examining the assumptions of existing models and approaches to educational change, and by analyzing evidence on actual user experience with educational innovations. The main conclusion is that the modal process of change whereby innovations are developed external to schools and then transmitted to them has led to no significant change at the user level. In the second section of the paper, the analysis is extended by relating the basic contentions and findings of the authors in the present issue to the criteria for effective change identified in the first section. These articles provide important state-of-the-field analyses of various aspects of school innovations in “organization for learning” and in curriculum. The overall conclusion in the final section is that a radical restructuring of the role of the user and a complete reversal of the direction of influence in the process of change are required if effective innovations are to occur. Finally, the main principles and elements of reform—techniques, activities, organizational forms—necessary to support this active user role, and other factors beyond the user level that might impinge on this role, are outlined.

Résumé

Cet article concentre l'attention sur le rôle de l'usager (étudiant, professeur, parent) dans le processus de l'évolution en éducation. Dans la première partie, l'auteur passe en revue les rapports de recherches et se livre à une étude critique des hypothèses servant de base aux modèles existants et des moyens d'aborder le problème de l'évolution en éducation; il analyse par ailleurs les preuves sur l'expérience réelle de l'usager en matière d'innovations éducatives. La conclusion principale tirée de cette étude est que le processus conditionnel de l'évolution, selon lequel les innovations se développent d'abord à l'extérieur de l'école pour y être communiquées par la suite, n'a pas abouti à un changement important au niveau de l'usager. Dans la deuxième partie, l'auteur pousse plus loin son analyse et compare les affirmations et les découvertes de base des auteurs de la présente publication, auteurs qui se sont penchés sur ce problème aux critères indispensables à l'évolution et identifiés dans la première partie. Ces articles renferment d'importantes analyses sur l'état du problème et sur les aspects relatifs aux innovations scolaires en matière “d'organisation en vue de l'apprentissage” et du programme d'études. Dans sa conclusion générale, exposée dans la dernière partie de l'article, l'auteur affirme que si l'on veut aboutir à des innovations efficaces, il faudra procéder à une restructuration radicale du rôle de l'usager et à un renversement complet de l'orientation de l'influence qui s'exerce dans le processus de l'évolution. Il énumère enfin les principes et les éléments fondamentaux de la réforme qui sont nécessaires à appuyer ce rôle actif de l'usager: techniques, activités, formules d'organisation—ainsi que les autres facteurs qui dépassent le niveau de l'usager et qui peuvent empiéter sur le rôle en question.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Adelson, M. Planning education for the future.American Behavioral Scientist, 1967,10, 1–12, 21–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Alberta Dept. of Education.A future of choices. Report of the Commission on Educational Planning. Edmonton: L. S. Wall-Queen's Printer, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Argyris, C.Intervention, theory and methods. Toronto: Addison-Wesley, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bailey, S., Ross, J., Sumnicht, L., & Teich, A.Significant educational research and innovations: Their potential contribution to experimental school designs. Syracuse, N. Y.: Syracuse University, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bell, W., & Mau, J.Sociology of the future. New York: Russell Sage Foundation, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bennett, W., Jr., & Falk, R.New careers and urban schools: A sociological study of teacher and teacher aide roles. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bereiter, C. Moral alternatives to education.Interchange, 1972,3(1), 25–41.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bhola, H. Innovation research and theory. Unpublished paper, School of Education, Ohio State University, 1965.

  • Bremer, J., & von Moschzisker, M.The school without walls. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brickell, H.Organizing New York State for educational change. Albany: New York State Department of Education, 1961.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brison, D. Restructuring the school system.Interchange, 1972,3(1), 63–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bushnell, D., & Rappaport, D. (Eds.)Planned change in education. New York: Harcourt-Brace-Jovanovich, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, R.Adoption of educational innovations. Eugene: University of Oregon, 1965.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chesler, M., & Lohman, J. Changing schools through student advocacy. In R. Schmuck & M. Miles (Eds.),Organization development in schools. Palo Alto: National Press Books, 1971. Pp. 185–212.

    Google Scholar 

  • Chin, R., & Benne, K. General strategies for effecting changes in human systems. In W. Bennis, K. Benne, & R. Chin (Eds.),The planning of change. (2d ed.) Toronto: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1969. Pp. 32–59.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, D., & Guba, E. An examination of potential change roles in education. Paper presented at Seminar on Innovation in Planning School Curriculum, Warrenton, Va., 1968.

  • Coleman, J., Campbell, E., Holson, C., McPartland, J., Mood, A., Weinfield, F., & York, R.Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1966.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coleman, P., & Wallin, H. A rationale for differentiated staffing.Interchange, 1971,2(3), 28–37.

    Google Scholar 

  • Combs, A.Educational accountability: Beyond behavioral objectives. Washington, D. C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dalin, P.Strategies for innovation in education. Paris: Centre for Educational Research and Innovation, Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, in press.

  • Freire, P.Pedagogy of the oppressed. New York: Herder & Herder, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fullan, M. The problems of school change and implications for organizational futures. Paper presented at the meeting of the Canadian Sociology and Anthropology Association and the Canadian Association of Professors in Education, Montreal, May 1972.

  • Fullan, M., Eastabrook, G., Spinner, D., & Loubser, J. J.Thornlea: A case study of an innovative secondary school. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodlad, J. Educational change: A strategy for change and action.National Elementary Principal, 1969,47, 6–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goodlad, J., Klein, M. F., et al.Behind the classroom door. Worthington, Ohio: Jones, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gordon, T.Parent effectiveness training. New York: Wyden, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, N., Giacquinta, J., & Bernstein, M.Implementing organizational innovations: A sociological analysis of planned educational change. New York: Basic Books, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gross, R., & Gross, B. (Eds.)Radical school reform. New York: Simon & Schuster, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Guba, E. A basis for educational improvement. Unpublished paper, National Institute for the Study of Educational Change, Bloomington, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harman, W. Alternative futures and educational policy. Unpublished paper, Educational Policy Research Center, Stanford Research Institute, 1970.

  • Hartley, H.Educational planning-programming-budgeting. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hartley, H. PPBS: Status and implications.Educational Leadership, 1972,29, 658–661.

    Google Scholar 

  • Haubrich, V. (Ed.)Freedom, bureaucracy and schooling. Washington, D. C.: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Havelock, R.Planning for innovation through dissemination and utilization of knowledge. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Havelock, R.A guide to innovation in education. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Havelock, R. The process and strategy of beneficial change: An analysis and critique of four perspectives. Unpublished paper, Center for Research on the Utilization of Scientific Knowledge, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedges, H. Using volunteers in schools. Unpublished paper, The Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 1972.

  • Hillson, M., & Hyman, R. (Eds.)Change and innovation in elementary and secondary organization. (2d ed.) Toronto: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hirsch, W. Z., et al.Inventing education for the future. San Francisco: Chandler, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hornstein, H., Bunker, B., Burke, W., Gindes, M., & Lewicki, R. (Eds.)Social intervention: A behavioral science approach. New York: Free Press, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hunt, D.Matching models in education. Toronto: Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Illich, I.Deschooling society. New York: Harper & Row, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jantsch, E.Technological forecasting in perspective. Paris: Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B.Alternative models of elementary education. Toronto: Xerox College Publishing, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Joyce, B. The curriculum worker of the future. In R. McClure (Ed.),The curriculum: Retrospect and prospect. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971. Pp. 307–355.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jung, C., & Lippitt, R. The study of change as a concept.Theory into Practice, 1966,5, 25–29.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kozol, J.Free schools. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lawless, D. Educational resources allocation system task force: An initial statement. Unpublished paper, Task Force of Ministry of Education, Ontario, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippitt, P., Lippitt, R., & Eiseman, J.Cross-age helping program: Orientation, training and related materials. Ann Arbor: Center for Research on the Utilization of Scientific Knowledge, University of Michigan, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lippitt, R. The dimensions of change: In our society, our students and our social studies curriculum. Unpublished paper, Center for Research on the Utilization of Scientific Knowledge, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 1969.

    Google Scholar 

  • Litwak, E., Shiroi, E., Zimmerman, L., & Bernstein, J. Community participation in bureaucratic organizations: Principles and strategies.Interchange, 1970,1(4), 63–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Livingstone, D. Alternative futures for formal education.Interchange, 1970,1(4), 13–27.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, L.Observations and analysis of the literature on change. Philadelphia: Research for Better Schools, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maguire, L., Temkin, S., & Cummings, C.,An annotated bibliography on administering for change. Philadelphia: Research for Better Schools, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Maidman, F. Family openness and patterns of adolescent social engagement. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Toronto, 1971.

  • Marien, M.Alternative futures for learning: Annotated bibliography. Syracuse: Educational Policy Research Center, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Martin, J., & Harrison, C.Free to learn: Unlocking and ungrading American education. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • McClure, R. (Ed.)The curriculum: Retrospect and prospect. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Meadows, D. H., Meadows, D. L., Randers, J., & Behrens, W.The limits to growth: A report for the Club of Rome's project on the predicament of mankind. New York: Universe Books, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Morphet, E., & Ryan, C.Designing education for the future. Number 3: Planning and effecting new changes in education. New York: Citation Press, 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ontario Dept. of Education.Living and learning. Report of the Provincial Committee on the Aims and Objectives of Education in the Schools of Ontario. Toronto: The Department, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Oscarson, J. Community involvement in accountability.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 1971,5, 79–86.

    Google Scholar 

  • Peabody, G. Power, Alinsky and other thoughts. In H. Hornstein, B. Bunker, W. Burke, M. Gindes, & R. Lewicki (Eds.),Social intervention: A behavioral science approach. New York: Free Press, 1971. Pp. 521–532.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reimer, E. An essay on alternatives in education.Interchange, 1971,2(1), 1–35.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E.Diffusion of innovations. New York: Free Press, 1962.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E., & Shoemaker, F.Communication of innovations: A cross cultural approach. (2d ed.) New York: Free Press, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosove, P. A provisional survey and evaluation of the current forecasting state of the art for possible contribution to long-range educational policy-making. Unpublished paper, System Development Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif., 1967.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rosove, P. An analysis of possible future roles of educators as derived from a contextual map. Unpublished paper, System Development Corporation, Santa Monica, Calif., 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  • Russell, H., & Leithwood, K. Evaluation and the diffusion of educational innovations. Unpublished paper, Trent Valley Centre, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, Toronto, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sarason, S.The culture of the school and the problem of change. Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schindler-Rainman, E., & Lippitt, R.The volunteer community: Creative use of human resources. Washington, D.C.: Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schindler-Rainman, E., Lippitt, R., & Fox, R.Toward a human society: Images of potentiality in the school and the community. Washington, D.C.: Institute for Applied Behavioral Science, in press.

  • Schmuck, R., & Miles, M. (Eds.)Organization development in schools. Palo Alto: National Press Books, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmuck, R., & Runkel, P.Organizational training for a school faculty. Eugene: University of Oregon, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmuck, R., & Runkel, P.Strategies for bringing parents, students and educators into joint decision-making: A proposal for a program. Eugene: Center for the Advanced Study of Educational Administration, University of Oregon, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schmuck, R., Runkel, P., Saturen, S., Martell, R., & Derr, C. B.Handbook of organizational development in schools. Palo Alto: National Press Books, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Silberman, C.Crisis in the classroom. New York: Vintage Books, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Smith, L., & Keith, P.Anatomy of educational innovation: An organizational analysis of an elementary school. Toronto: Wiley, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Stevenson, H., & Hamilton, W. (Eds.)Canadian education and the future: A selected annotated bibliography, 1967–1971. London: University of Western Ontario, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  • Toffler, A.Future shock. Toronto: Bantam Books, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Umans, S.The management of education: A systematic design for educational revolution. New York: Doubleday, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Unruh, G., & Alexander, W.Innovations in secondary education. Toronto: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Til, W. (Ed.)Curriculum: Quest for relevance. Boston: Houghton-Mifflin, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wittes, S.People and power: A study of crisis in secondary schools. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, 1970.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wolf, R. Making education accountable to the learner: A framework for evaluation.Journal of Research and Development in Education, 1971,5, 37–48.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Additional information

OISE

I would like to thank Andrew Effrat and Paul Paschke for their many valuable contributions in developing this issue, and Glenn Eastabrook for many ideas included in the introduction. I would also like to thank Nancy McIntosh for typing this introduction, and Barbara Finch and Catherine Cragg for their extensive editorial work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fullan, M. Overview of the innovative process and the user. Interchange 3, 1–46 (1972). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02137634

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02137634

Keywords

Navigation