Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

Is transferring an educational innovation actually a process of transformation?

Is transferring an educational innovation actually a process of transformation? Recent debates question the extent to which adopting an educational innovation requires compromise between the innovation’s original design and the adoption site’s context. Through compromises, the innovation’s fundamental principles may be transferred, transformed, or abandoned. This paper analyzes such compromises during the piloting of Team-Based Learning (TBL). We ask: When is the process of transferring an innovation actually a process of transformation? This study is an autoethnography of our research team’s implementation process. Autoethnographies are personalized accounts where authors draw on their own experiences to extend understanding of a particular topic. To conduct this autoethnography, we used an in-depth, interactive interview with the piloting clinician educator. In the analysis of TBL’s fundamental principles, some aspects of the principles transferred easily, while others were transformed. Analysis raised concerns that the transformations threatened the foundational principles of TBL. While an educational innovation’s techniques may seem to be surface structures, they are realizations of deeper fundamental principles. The fundamental principles are themselves realizations of the innovation’s foundational philosophy. When techniques and/or principles are modified to a context, it is important to analyze if the modifications continue to uphold the innovation’s philosophy. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Advances in Health Sciences Education Springer Journals

Is transferring an educational innovation actually a process of transformation?

Download PDF
11 pages

Loading next page...
 
/lp/springer-journals/is-transferring-an-educational-innovation-actually-a-process-of-PAp2G6qVEe

References (34)

Publisher
Springer Journals
Copyright
Copyright © 2011 by Springer Science+Business Media B.V.
Subject
Education; Medical Education
ISSN
1382-4996
eISSN
1573-1677
DOI
10.1007/s10459-011-9313-4
pmid
21725841
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

Recent debates question the extent to which adopting an educational innovation requires compromise between the innovation’s original design and the adoption site’s context. Through compromises, the innovation’s fundamental principles may be transferred, transformed, or abandoned. This paper analyzes such compromises during the piloting of Team-Based Learning (TBL). We ask: When is the process of transferring an innovation actually a process of transformation? This study is an autoethnography of our research team’s implementation process. Autoethnographies are personalized accounts where authors draw on their own experiences to extend understanding of a particular topic. To conduct this autoethnography, we used an in-depth, interactive interview with the piloting clinician educator. In the analysis of TBL’s fundamental principles, some aspects of the principles transferred easily, while others were transformed. Analysis raised concerns that the transformations threatened the foundational principles of TBL. While an educational innovation’s techniques may seem to be surface structures, they are realizations of deeper fundamental principles. The fundamental principles are themselves realizations of the innovation’s foundational philosophy. When techniques and/or principles are modified to a context, it is important to analyze if the modifications continue to uphold the innovation’s philosophy.

Journal

Advances in Health Sciences Education – Springer Journals

Published: Jul 3, 2011

There are no references for this article.