The document describes a two-year Master's program called Master Learning and Innovation/Digital Learning Innovation that aims to train teachers and educators in designing effective digital pedagogical innovations. The program focuses on developing competencies in research, design, change management, and reflection. It involves coursework covering topics like innovative educational design, digital learning innovation, and supervising change in education. Students complete projects researching and designing IT-related innovations. Evaluations found that while students enjoyed the program, some complained about workload and that designs could be more creative with stronger connections between technology use and pedagogy. The document discusses ways to improve innovation program designs and the assessment approach.

1. designing effective digital pedagogical innovation
from: designing as a teacher to designing as an innovator

3. MLI/DLI [2015]
[context]
[master learning and innovation]
[for teachers in primary, secondary, vocational and
higher education]
[60 ECTS]
[parttime, two year]
[about 120 students]
[since 2009]
[accreditation: good - good - good]

4. Competent in Research
Competent in Design
Competent in Change
Competent in Reflection

5. Year 1
1st period 2nd period 3rd period 4th period
Integrated learning line
competency
exam 1
change in
perspective
of learning
innovative
educational
design
projects &
quality in
education
research

6. Year 2
1st period 2nd period 3rd period 4th period
Integrated learning line
competency
exam 2
supervising
change in
education
digital
learning
innovation
prepare
competency
exam
research

7. Year 2
1st period 2nd period 3rd period 4th period
Integrated learning line
competency
exam 2
supervising
change in
education
digital
learning
innovation
prepare
competence
exam
research

8. Competent in Research
Competent in Design
Competent in Change
Competent in Reflection

9. MLI/DLI [2015]
[test]
[report] —> research a recently completed digital
innovation (in the classroom or in the organization)
[design] —> a it-related innovation
[evaluate] —> the design and your role

10. MLI/DLI [2015]
[test]
[report]
⌘ the research of the innovation-history in your
organization: what are the enabling and hindering factors in
your organization? Can you divide the population into sub-
populations? On what rationale? Function? Acceptance of
the innovation?
⌘ what are the innovation goals (for the new innovation) for
the distinguished sub-populations?
⌘ design a innovation program
⌘ evaluate your role as a innovator

11. Digital [technology]
Learn [people]
Innovate [organise]
research - design - reflect

12. MLI/DLI [2015]
[key principle]
Digital innovation is people work
Two key authors:
Fullan & Donnelly (2013)
Kreijns (2010)

13. MLI/DLI [2015]
[Fullan & Donnelly]

14. MLI/DLI [2015]
[Kreijns]
‘when teachers do not
use digital learning
materials, see it as
problem behavior’
addiction care model
—> intervention
mapping model

15. MLI/DLI [2015]
[Kreijns]
understand the problem behavior
intervention
innovations goals per
subpopulation
based on research
design

17. MLI/DLI [2015]
[learning path]
[1] setting the canvas
[2] what would you research, how to get your data
[3] instruments
[4] analyse
[5] design & evaluate

18. MLI/DLI [2015]
[results]
test results:
⌘ in most of the schools: IT-related innovations
(VLE’s, test-software, student-tracking-sytems,
social media, etc.);
⌘ variations of IT-use between teachers and
institutes
⌘ less (or no) relation between the IT used and
the pedagogic/content: structuring education,
marketing reasons.

20. MLI/DLI [2015]
[results]
test results:
⌘ less creative design: generally, innovation
programs consists of describing vision (plans),
professional development and making
agreements of the use of IT

21. MLI/DLI [2015]
[results]
evaluations:
⌘ students likes the module, especially the
balance between us as a model and the
content
⌘ but complain about the amount of work,
⌘ they appreciate the structure in the colleges
⌘ liked that the teacher is a role-model

22. MLI/DLI [2015]
[literature]
Fransen, J., Bottema, J., Goozen, B. van, Swager, P. & Wijngaards, G. (2012). Acceptatie en duurzame
implementatie van de didactische inzet van ICT. Rapportage van een onderzoek naar de relaties tussen
persoonlijke en contextuele factoren en hun invloed op brede acceptatie en duurzame implementatie van
ICT in de praktijk van het onderwijs. Rotterdam: Inholland Lectoraat eLearning. Verkrijgbaar op: http://
goo.gl/kIkYF5.
Fullan, M. & Donnely, K. (2013). Alive in the Swamp: Assessing Digital Innovations in Education. London:
Nesta. Verkrijgbaar op: http://goo.gl/NnNv1c.
Kennisnet (2015). Vier in balans monitor 2015. De laatste stand van zaken van ict in het onderwijs.
Zoetermeer: Kennisnet. Verkrijgbaar op: https://goo.gl/x3LDhT.
Kreijns, C.J. (2009). Als ICT een meerwaarde heeft, waarom gebruiken leraren dit dan niet in hun lessen en
wat kunnen wij daar aan doen? Eindhoven: Fonthys Hogeschool. Oratie. Verkrijgbaar op: http://goo.gl/
XPf2uK.
Means, B., Toyama, Y., Murphy, R., Bakia, M. & Jones, K. (2009). Evaluation of evidence-based practicies
in online learning: a meta-analysis and review of online learning studies. Washington: U.S. Department of
Education (https://goo.gl/PFNLGX).
New Media Consortium (2015). The NMC Horizonreport. Austin: New Media Consortium (http://goo.gl/
6pmzLN). Kies het rapport dat het beste past bij de sector waarin je werkt.
Vermeulen, M., Acker, F. van, Kreijns, C.J., Buuren, H. van (2012). Leraren en hun intentie tot het gebruik
van digitale leermiddelen in hun onderwijspraktijk. Pedagogische Studiën 2012 (89), 159-173. (http://
goo.gl/wggbmC).
Vanderlinde, R., Van Braak, J. & Dexter, S. (2012). ICT Policy planing in a context of curriculum reform:
Disentanglement of ICT policy domains and artifacts. Computers & Education 58(2012), 1339-1350. (http://
goo.gl/G2E1zJ).
Vermeulen, M., Acker, F. van, Kreijns, C.J., Buuren, H. van (2012). Leraren en hun intentie tot het gebruik
van digitale leermiddelen in hun onderwijspraktijk. Pedagogische Studiën 2012 (89) 159-173.
Voogt, J. (2015). Docent en ICT, een constructieve relatie. De lectorale rede ten behoeve van het
lectoraat ‘Onderwijsinnovatie en ICT’. Zwolle: Windesheimreeks kennis en onderzoek, nr. 51. (http://goo.gl/
Ypn4ps)

23. MLI/DLI [2015]
[design questions]
As a designer and teacher i’m satisfied with
evaluations, although:
⌘ how can we increase creativity in the design?
⌘ how can we increase M- or R-innovations
according to the SAMR-model?
⌘ how can we increase appropriate
innovations?: appropriate between the needs
and the solution?
⌘ is the outline of the test appropriate?