This short paper explores what educational technologists in one South African Institution consider innovation to be. Ten educational technologists in various faculties across the university were interviewed and asked to define and answer questions about innovation. Their answers were coded and the results of the overlaps in coding have been assimilated into a definition. Soft systems methodology (SSM) was used as a method to approach the complexity of innovation in educational technology in one setting. The initial definition formed the ‘situation definition’ in SSM terms. The method proved useful in producing a picture (based on rich pictures drawn by each person) and a root definition (based on CATWOE a mnemonic that enables the interviewer to ask each participant to identify processes and role players). The problem The work of the Centre for Educational Technology (CET) at the University of Cape Town (UCT) has shown that there are pockets of innovation occurring across the institution-these need to be identified, showcased, acknowledged and assessed. As a staff developer it is essential to be aware of these innovations but in the rapidly changing landscape where technology is ubiquitous it is more difficult than previously to track these developments. It is important because CET’s role is to promote the effective use of educational technology and if we are not aware of innovative use we cannot share examples and help staff to find the best solution to their teaching challenges. Why is it important to study innovation? An understanding of the nature of innovation will enable educational technologists (ET’s) to identify and showcase it in order to share ideas and inspire colleagues with the goal of enhancing student learning. Our concern now is with good practice, quality interventions, and innovation where the pedagogical benefits of technology have been harnessed. The first step in this process is to find some kind of consensus as to how ET’s define innovation. Ten practitioners (including educational technologists and others working in the field of computer science) from various faculties of the university were interviewed to find out: What counts as innovation in the current educational technology landscape?
[1]
Peter Checkland,et al.
Soft Systems Methodology in Action
,
1990
.
[2]
Peter Checkland,et al.
Process and content: two ways of using SSM
,
2006,
J. Oper. Res. Soc..
[3]
Leonie Rowan,et al.
Innovation chains: possibilities and constraints for critical perspectives on computers, difference and educational innovation
,
2004
.
[4]
Birgitta Bergvall-Kåreborn,et al.
Basic Principles of SSM Modeling: An Examination of CATWOE from a Soft Perspective
,
2004
.
[5]
Gilly Salmon,et al.
Flying not flapping : a strategic framework for e-learning and pedagogical innovation in higher education institutions
,
2005
.
[6]
R Gourlay,et al.
Learning in action.
,
1986,
The Health service journal.
[7]
Luke Houghton,et al.
The Evolution of Confusion: soft systems methodology and social theory revisited
,
2002,
Australas. J. Inf. Syst..