Skip to main content
Log in

Do teaching innovation projects make a difference? Assessing the impact of small-scale funding

  • Published:
Tertiary Education and Management Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This article presents the outcomes of a research study carried out during 2015–2016 at the University of Valencia (Spain) to understand the factors influencing the impact of small-scale innovation funding on teachers’ practices, the learning culture of the teaching team and the satisfaction of students’ learning. The research used a mixed-method design: a questionnaire examined the factors influencing transfer of innovation; in-depth interviews with project leaders yielded information about the adoption and transfer of funded projects; and a focus group with institutional managers provided suggestions to improve the efficiency of the innovation projects and calls. The results provide qualitative and quantitative evidence of the capacity of the scheme to deliver outcomes that enhance the teaching practices of the funded teams. The design of the innovation project, the innovation culture of the teaching team and the context of the implementation appear as factors that have a positive impact on the transfer, adoption and sustainability of an innovation.

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

  • Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50(2), 179–211.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ajzen, I., & Fishbein, M. (1980). Understanding attitudes and predicting social behavior. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Biggs, J. B. (2001). The reflective institution: Assuring and enhancing the quality of teaching and learning. Higher Education, 41, 221.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyd, V., & Sampson, A. (2016). Foundation versus innovation: Developing creative education practitioner confidence in the complex blended learning and scope. Professional Development in Education, 42(3), 502–506.

    Google Scholar 

  • Boyer, E. (1990). Scholarship Reconsidered. Priorities of the Professorate. Los Angeles, CA: The Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

    Google Scholar 

  • Collie, S. L., & Taylor, A. L. (2004). Improving teaching quality and the learning organisation. Tertiary Education and Management, 10(2), 139–155.

    Google Scholar 

  • Davis, F. D., Bagozzi, R. P., & Warshaw, P. R. (1989). Useracceptance of computertechnology: A comparison of two theoretical models. Management Science, 35(8), 982–1003.

    Google Scholar 

  • De la Torre, E. M., Gómez-Sancho, J. M.,& Pérez-Esparrells, C. (2017). Comparing University performance by legal status: A Malmquist-type index approach for the case of the Spanish higher Education system. Tertiary Education and Management, 28(2), 1–16.

    Google Scholar 

  • De Rijdt, C., Stes, A., van der Vleuten, C., & Dochy, F. (2013). Influencing variables and moderators of transfer of learning to the workplace within the area of staff development in higher education: Research review. Educational Research Review, 8, 48–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • de Saille, S. (2015). Innovating innovation policy: The emergence or ‘Responsible Research and Innovation’. Journal of Responsible Innovation, 2(2), 152–168.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feixas, M., Duran, M. M., Fernández, I., Fernández, A., García San Pedro, M. J., Márquez, M. D., … Lagos, P. (2013). ¿Cómo medir la transferencia de la formación en Educación Superior?: el Cuestionario de Factores de Transferencia [How to measure academic development transfer in higher education?: The Questionnaire of Transfer Factors]. Revistade Docencia Universitaria, 11(3), 219–248.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gargallo, B., Morera, I., Iborra, S., Climet, M. J., Navalón, S., & García-Félix, E. (2014). Metodología centrada en el aprendizaje. Su impacto en las estrategias de aprendizaje y en el rendimiento académico de los estudiantes universitarios [Methodology centered in student learning. Its impact in the learning strategies and in the academic performance of university students]. Revista Española de Pedagogía, 72(259), 415–435.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gibbs, G., Holmes, A., & Segal, R. (2002). Funding innovation and disseminating new teaching practices. Milton Keynes: National Co-ordination Team and Teaching Quality Enhancement Fund, The Open University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gros, B. (2016). Tecnologías digitales e innovación educativa: retos de una relación inevitable [Digital technologies and educational innovation: Challenges of an inevitable relationship]. En J. M. Mominó & C. Sigalés (Coords.), El impacto de las TIC en educación: más allá de las promesas [The impact of ICT in education: beyond promises] (pp. 157–176). Barcelona: UOC ediciones.

    Google Scholar 

  • Holton, E. F., III. (2005). Holton’s evaluation model: New evidence and construct elaborations. Advances in Developing Human Resources, 7(1), 37–54.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kirkpatrick, D. L. (1998). Evaluating training programmes. The four levels (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler Publishers Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lewins, A., & Silver, C. (2007). Using software in qualitative research: A step-by-step guide. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Marcelo, C., Mayor, C., & Gallego, B. (2011). Evaluación de la innovación educativa [Evaluation of educational innovation]. En C. Marcelo (Coord.). Evaluación del desarrollo profesional docente [Evaluation of the teachers’ profesional development] (pp. 129–150). Barcelona: Editorial Davinci.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mauri, T., Coll, C., & Onrubia, J. (2007). La evaluación de la calidad de los procesos de innovación docente universitaria. Una perspectiva constructivista [Evaluation of the quality of the processes of university teaching innovation. A constructivist perspective]. Revista de Docencia Universitaria, 1, 5–17.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nunnally, J. C. (1978). Psychometric theory (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Perrin, L., & Powell, B. (2004). Short-term intervention, long-term gain: Using action research projects for quality improvement in adult and community learning. London: Learning and Skills Development Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pineda-Herrero, P., Quesada-Pallarès, C.,& Ciraso-Calí, A. (2014). Evaluation of training transfer factors: The FET model. In K. Schneider, Transfer of learning in organizations (pp. 121–144). Cham: Springer International Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Polikoff, M.S., & Porter, A.C. (2014). Instructional alignment as a measure of teaching quality. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 36(4), 399–416.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers, E. (2009). Understanding technology adoption: Theory and future directions for informal learning. Review of Educational Research, 79(2), 625–649.

    Google Scholar 

  • San-Martín, A., & Peirats, J. (2014). Centros educativos inteligentes, luces y sombras sobre las políticas de transferencia tecnológica y las prácticas docentes [Intelligent educational centers, lights and shadows about the policies of technological transfer and the teaching practices]. Profesorado. Revista de Curriculum y formación del profesorado, 18(3), 64–79.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tomàs, M., Castro, D., & Feixas, M. (2010). Dimensiones para el análisis de las innovaciones en la universidad. Propuesta de un modelo [Dimensions for the analysis of innovations at university. A model proposal]. Bordón, 62(10), 139–151.

    Google Scholar 

  • Valverde, J., Fernández-Sánchez, M. R., & Revuelta, F. I. (2013). El bienestar subjetivo ante las buenas prácticas educativas con TIC: su influencia en profesorado innovador [The subjective wellbeing against good educational practices with ICT: its influence in the innovative teacher]. Educación XXI, 16(1), 255–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • Venkatesh, V., Morris, M. G., Davis, G. B., & Davis, F. D. (2003). User acceptance of information technology: Toward a unified view. MIS Quarterly, 27(3), 425–478.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vizcarro, C. (2003). Evaluación de la calidad de la docencia para su mejora. Revista de la Red Estatal de Docencia Universitaria, 3(1), 5–18.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, C. (2015). Organisational culture and technology-enhanced innovation in higher education. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 24(1), 65–79.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mònica Feixas.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Feixas, M., Martínez-Usarralde, MJ. & López-Martín, R. Do teaching innovation projects make a difference? Assessing the impact of small-scale funding. Tert Educ Manag 24, 267–283 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2017.1417470

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/13583883.2017.1417470

Keywords

Navigation