Introduction
There are a great variety of innovation projects that have been implemented in
schools. It can be pointed out that "the main problem is not the absence of
innovation in educational institutions, but the presence of too many unrelated,
episodic, fragmentary, and superfluous projects" (Fullan, 2002, p.53).
Educational innovation is an intentional process of change (Moreno, 2000),
carried out by a teacher or a group of teachers who modifies contents,
attitudes, ideas, cultures, models and introduces new methodologies or uses new
resources and technologies in the process of teaching and learning and which
"natural" place of development is the classroom (Murillo, 2002,
Anderson, & Shattuck, 2012, Education, & Mean, 2013).
Innovation requires builders and non-road followers, to mobilize the imagination
and commitment of those who wish to build "something different," or
"doing differently" what is done ordinarily (De Souza et al., 2005).
Innovation generates changes in educational processes, teaching practice and
results. And for that change is required, to understand its complexity and what
aspects should be considered for its implementation. Therefore, the teacher must
be involved and predisposed to change, he plays an important role in any
innovation process since he is the one who puts it into practice in its teaching
management.
Method
To accomplish this work, we have taken into account some considerations
applicable to the revisions, proposed by Sánchez & Botella (2010). It is
intended to answer how teacher training influences educational innovation and
the improvement of the educational center. To achieve this goal, a study search
was conducted taking into account the following selection criterion: the
existent works that refer to teacher training, educational innovation and center
improvement. Once the criteria for the selection of studies were established,
the search process was carried out.
An exhaustive review of the scientific literature of 64 bibliographic sources
was carried out; the materials were research articles, theoretical articles,
books and doctoral theses during the period 1995-2017. The search tools used to
make the review were ISOC (Social Sciences and Humanities), Redalyc, Dialnet and
Google Scholar with the following keywords: teacher training, educational
innovation and improvement of educational centers.
It was made an interpretative review of the information, distinguishing between
research studies and theoretical works. Regarding the analysis of the
information, this was carried out in an inductive way. As the material was
studied, it came up different elements related to the teacher’s training and
its impact on innovation and improvement of the educational center. In order to
facilitate a better understanding and exposition of these issues, they were
divided according to a double vision: from the perspective of theory and from
the perspective of the person who innovates (teacher) and contributes to the
improvement of the educational service (Abad, Benito, Giménez & Robles,
2013; Sánchez, 2010).
What
do we call educational innovation?
According to the Spanish Royal Academy the determined concept for innovation, is
that it is conceived as the "action and effect of innovation".
Educational innovation is generated in school institutions and has some elements
that should be considered such as: the alteration of things (Riesco, 2013);
which is linked to creativity (De la Herrán, 2009) and has an intentionality
and tries to modify attitudes, ideas, cultures, contents, models and pedagogical
practices (Carbonell, 2001). It promotes changes that can be managed by a
teacher or a group of teachers to modify the learning environment, contents,
ways of seeing and thinking disciplines, strategies deployed and the ways of
organizing and linking each discipline with another. It introduces new
methodologies and means of communication, it uses new resources and technologies
to evaluate the teaching - learning process which "natural" place of
development is the classroom (Murillo & Muñoz, 2002; Shapiro, Henrik &
Bayer, 2007; it implies a change that seeks the improvement of an educational
practice; it is a deliberate, organized and planned effort aimed at qualitative
improvement of educational processes; it entails learning for those who are
actively involved in the innovation process (Margalef & Arenas 2006); to
improve the quality of the student’s learning (Blanco, 2005) and achieve
transformative action in the world (UNESCO, 2016).
For the Ministry of Education (2017) innovation is defined:
As the process of change in which an educational institution incurs, where it
seeks to give a true transformation to the reality that experiences and
depends on the level of depth and the type of changes you are looking for. The
purpose is to engage in a cycle of innovation, a spiral of changes, which
purpose is for the student's learning process to become increasingly
significant, understood as the act of going to the deepening of the acquired
knowledge, the developed skills, the enhanced values and the educational
process in which it is linked (p.1).
De la Torre (1997) contributes with four new aspects related to innovation:
-
Innovation
as a process, whose management is learned, must arise in the educational
center and is managed from the center itself.
-
It
is a specific and global change in all fields of education, it not only
contributes to the improvement of practices, but also in the field of ideas
and instruments and materials.
-
The
process culminates with the consolidation of innovation, the internalization
and the institutionalization of the process, so that the change is
incorporated into the system.
-
Personal
and institutional growth as a permanent improvement. The real change of all
innovation, its ultimate purpose, is not in things, not in forms, not in
instruments, not even in processes, but in people and institutions. That is,
it contributes to the growth of: a) the teacher, at a personal and
professional level that can range from the personal satisfaction of having
completed a project or work until the best understanding of the processes,
changes of attitude or habit of reflection on their practice ; B) of the
students as beneficiaries of the innovation is evidenced in changes
regarding the solidity, effectiveness or transferability of the learned
things to new situations and contexts; In the greater involvement in the
learning tasks; in the awareness of their own learning or metacognition; in
the acquisition of new social values; cooperation, democracy, respect for
others, conservation of the environment, etc. ; and c) institutional, which
manifests itself in the improvement of the communication climate between the
different members of the educational community; new channels or channels of
communication with the outside are created and support among the teaching
staff; it has a positive external projection of the educational center.
Innovation also helps to sell the image of a living institution adapted to
the new times and requirements of today's society.
Educational innovation is a multidimensional process where technological
advances, globalization of markets, global politics, new social trends, new
values, new social practices and others affect different contextual levels, from
the classroom level to the educational center (Salinas, 2004, Salinas, 2008,
Castillo & De Benito, 2008). Therefore, innovation becomes a widespread
need, since society is constantly changing and requires organizations and
individuals to adapt, to review their ways of acting and to seek maximum
coherence in relation to the needs of the environment, and be approached with
different strategies (Garín, 2003, p.11). Innovation introduces changes and
produces improvement, these changes respond to a planned, deliberative,
systematized and intentional process, not simple novelty, momentary changes or
visionary proposals (Salinas, 2004). Therefore, it requires builders and
non-road followers, to mobilize the imagination and commitment of those who wish
to build "something different", or "to do differently" what
is done in an ordinary way (De Souza et al).
The changes can come from different forces, regardless of where they come from
they basically disturb. They cause fear related to the loss of: security,
ability, relationships, territories and direction.
An
innovative educational center
Improving schools do so primarily because they understand that the classroom is
the core of change (Hargreaves and Fullan, 2014). And it is an opportunity and
an excuse to reflect on the practice as a means to promote improvements in
schools (Gairín, Armengol & Muñoz, 2010).
Some theorists define some characteristics the educational centers that innovate
have (Blanco, 2006; Hopkins, 2008; Murillo & Krichesky, 2014; Marcelo, Mayor
& Gallego, 2010; Arencibia & Moreno, 2010; Aramendi, 2010a; Aramendi,
2010b; Sánchez And Murillo, 2010, Santizo, 2009, Pont, Nusche & Moorman,
2009, Bolivar, 2015) as follows:
-
Communities
that take on challenges and are constantly looking for new ideas and ways to
achieve greater development in teachers, students and the school itself.
-
Concerned
about the quality of teaching they develop and perceive that these
innovations have positive impacts on their classes (Marcelo, Mayor &
Gallego, 2010); they foster the educational success of all students, the
attention to diversity and the opening of centers to the community
(Aramendi, 2010a). They produce important changes in the life of the center,
in the teaching and learning processes, in the use of teaching materials, in
the distribution of time, in the assignment of tasks to students, in the
relations with the community, in the distribution of spaces and schedules
and in the equipment of the educational center (Aramendi, 2010b, p.169).
-
There
is a willingness to change the conceptions, attitudes and practices; it
fosters a culture of work and cooperation, focused on learning and teaching.
-It lives a good center climate and fluent communication processes (Sánchez
& Murillo, 2010, p 178).
-
They
generate team processes of investigation and critical reflection that allows
not falling into a routine practice.
-
There
is an experienced staff, willing to face problems and take risks and to
carry out new initiatives (Marcelo, Mayor & Gallego, 2010). It improves
the professional self-esteem of teachers, forming a cohesive and stable
group of teachers. Teamwork and the involvement of professionals are
encouraged to consolidate change initiatives (Aramendi, 2010b; Sánchez
& Murillo, 2010).
-
Managers
are interested in and involved in projects, so their leadership plays a key
role in improving school outcomes by influencing teachers' motivations and
abilities, as well as the work environment the teachers have. School leaders
are the bearers of all innovation and should focus on teaching and learning,
this drives the improvement of academic achievement to become schools, as
complex organizations, into teaching communities (Santizo, 2009, Pont,
Nusche and Moorman, 2009, Bolivar, 2015, Marcelo, Mayor & Gallego,
2010). Managers have experience and professional prestige (López &
Lavié, 2010). "Management teams are the soul of these changes that
occur in the centers" (Sánchez & Murillo, 2010, p 178). The
management team of the center is the leader of these processes, but this
depends on their attitude, the role they assume in the educational center
and how it is seen by the rest of the teachers (Sepúlveda & Murillo,
2012).
-
The
center has a culture of innovation, which includes the processes of change
(Arencibia & Moreno, 2010). The collaborative culture of teachers is
necessary for professional development, which implies continuous and
collaborative learning through which all teachers increase their knowledge,
both individually and collectively (Krichesky and Murillo, 2011); and
innovation is not reduced to mere structural changes (Salinas &
Cotillas, 2010). Where the satisfactory school climate contributes to the
continuity of the processes of change (López, 2010).
-
Teachers
are involved in professional networks that make it possible to share ideas
and experiences (Escudero, 2014).
-
They
have a professional development plan for teachers and this is an essential
tool for school improvement "(Vaillant & Marcelo, 2015). Where
teachers commit to transform some of their conceptions and practices around
pedagogy, methodology and didactics to find new ways to meet the needs and
interests of their students (Castro & Martinez, 2016).
Educational
innovation generates changes
Innovation must generate processes of change. The following aphorisms help us to
understand the concept: a) we cannot hide ourselves in order not to change.
Change is inevitable; b) although we resist change, it is challenging us
permanently; c) Change is to live. Change is so important that not changing is
being condemned to death; d) Changing thinking about change is the most
difficult and attractive challenge that exists; e) We do not change by methods,
but we do not change without them; f) It is more difficult to change at an older
age; g) We can see the change in the others. But not in us, this is the blind
spot of change; and, h) the effects of change cannot be predicted, although we
can know its causes. (De Souza et al, 2010, p.90).
The process of school change begins when a member of the school community, a
member of the management team or a teacher, concludes that he has to "do
something" to change the educational situation and initiates a process of
transformation (Sepúlveda, & Murillo, 2012, p.7) These authors conceive
change as "any process that implies alterations from an initial situation,
modifications that can be both intentional, managed and planned as natural.
Likewise, changes are the result of such processes. "
Fullan (2002) indicates that "the implementation of educational change
implies change in practice" (p.69). Therefore, it is taken into
consideration to: a) the possible use of new or revised materials; b) The
possible use of new didactic approaches; and c) The possible alteration of
beliefs.
Murillo & Krichesky (2012) state that in order to design and sustain a
process of school change, it is necessary to know at least the nature of the
change, as well as the stages through which educational centers develop
improvement programs (p.41). As can be seen in the following table.
Table
1. Basic assumptions to face a process of school change
|
School’s
change processes |
-
Do
not assume that your version of what the change should be is what can
or should be implemented.
-
Understand
that any significant innovation requires for the individuals
implementing it to develop their own sense of it.
-
Assume
that schools are - usually - conservative institutions (we are people
too).
-
Understand
that big changes start with small efforts.
-
Understand
that conflict and disagreement are not only inevitable, but are
imperative for change to succeed.
-
Assume
that pressure is required for people to change, but pressure will only
be effective under certain conditions.
-
Be
patient. Effective changes take time. They are processes that demand a
continuous evolution. A moderately complex change requires between 3
and 5 years. One more complicated between 5 and 10 years.
-
Do
not believe that the cause by which implementations are not developed
is an open rejection of the values that the change
entails or a resistance to any attempt at improvement.
-
Accept
that you cannot stay well with everyone; there will always be those
who resist change.
-
Be
alert! Things often change so that everything stays the same.
-
Do
not expect all individuals and groups to change.
-
Assume
you will need a plan based on the above assumptions which takes into
account the known factors that affect the implementation.
-
Recognize
that, as much as you know, your knowledge will always be insufficient
to clarify exactly what measures should be taken.
-
Understand
that the real goal is to change the culture of institutions, not to
implement isolated developments.
|
Source:
Murillo & Krichesky (2012)
Although the processes of change are complex, these types of recommendations can
be guidelines for addressing them.
The improvement of the school is a systematic and continuous effort to
effectively meet the needs of 21st century students by changing the learning
conditions and other associated internal conditions in one or more schools, with
the ultimate objective of achieving the educational goals, more effectively
"(Murillo & Muñoz, 2002; Kampylis, Bocconi & Punie, 2012). It is
also conceived as a series of concurrent and recurrent processes by which an
educational center optimizes the integral development of students, by increasing
the quality of the educational service and its teaching staff (Murillo &
Krichesky, 2014).
Schools that have a culture of improvement develop and are more likely to
succeed than centers that often try to avoid change and fear innovation. In this
way, the culture of improvement can be considered as the basis of all the
processes of change of the educational centers (Sepúlveda & Murillo, 2012)
In order to have a change, we must consider some realities that occur in the
educational center, such as the cultural roots of teaching practices, ways of
influencing the center's political decisions, declarations and processes for the
development of innovations and reforms that affect each of the educational
institutions, prestige or dominant social and economic practices at a given time
and place, professional beliefs, management modes and contents of the problems
of schools ... are some of the elements that interact to create, or not, the
correct conditions to change (García, 2005).
The
main character of educational innovation
The success of the transformations that are carried out in the educational
centers is necessarily due to the cognitive and affective involvement of the
teaching staff, who from their personal and professional characteristics can
design and execute positive change actions within the framework of their
pedagogical practice, But this can be achieved through the professional
development of teachers that contributes to school improvement (Vaillant &
Marcelo, 2015).
Teachers are the main characters and authors of educational innovation.
Therefore, they must be involved for the changes to be profound, lasting and
transformative. It is very important that the changes make sense for them, so,
they respond to their concerns and needs (Blanco, 2006; Rodríguez, Pozuelos
& García, 2012). A center is difficult to improve if teachers do not change
and, in that line, teacher training has revealed itself as a strategy for change
and a key factor for the success of the programs. However, it is important to
emphasize that the training must be linked to the center and the students' own
needs to improve the learning quality of the students and the achievement of
learning standards (Murillo, 2003, Ríos, 2009, Company, Gómez &
Perandones, 2009, Commission of the European Communities, 2007, Rodríguez,
2015). This training commits teachers to transform some of their conceptions and
practices around pedagogy, methodology and didactics to find new ways to meet
the needs and interests of their own contexts (Castro & Martínez, 2016;
Hopkins, 2008). Teachers have predisposition, attitude and eagerness to see what
is not working well and change the reality (Arencibia & Moreno, 2010).
Teachers experience change both personally and professionally. In fact, change
depends on the thoughts and actions of teachers, which means that the role of
teacher development is not only a process but one of the desired results in the
improvement of the school. Essentially the improvement of the school depends on
the participation of teachers and has major implications for their own
development (Stoll and Fink, 1999, p.238).
Reynolds et al. (1997) state that the school will not improve if teachers do not
evolve individually and collectively. Although teachers can develop their own
practices, if the school as a whole aims to evolve, there must be many
opportunities for teacher’s development so that teachers can learn together.
Teacher’s training has emerged as a strategy for changing and a key factor in
the success of the programs. However, it is important to emphasize the need for
the teacher’s training to be linked to the center and its needs (Murillo,
2003).
Bolivar (2009) proposes that any change requires teachers to become
professional:
"All the educational reforms of the last decades have included in their
priority proposals that the exercise of education can become more"
professionalized "as a prerequisite to increase the desired educational
improvement. Placing teachers as the key to the success of educational
changes, it is proposed to transform the roles and conditions of teaching
professional practice. On one hand, political rhetoric links the key mission
of teachers, on the other hand, the controls of new educational policies and
the prescriptions of the experts contribute to make them less
professionals"(p.32).
Zabalza & Zabalza (2012) state that there is no innovation without training,
so it is necessary to have sustained processes of teacher’s training and all
the persons involved. And it must meet two basic requirements, being permanent
and relevant: i) permanent: is often thought that with a conference, workshop,
seminar, etc., the teacher is in a position to implement innovation.
Unfortunately, this is not the case, since there must be an adequate planning to
ensure its sustainability. (Ii) Relevant: consistent with the spirit of
innovation. It would be desirable for any innovation proposal to always include
a parallel training proposal for innovation.
Therefore, in order to achieve quality education, it is necessary to transform
"classroom work", where teachers are responsible for fostering a
learning community through methodologies that favor authentic, intriguing,
situational activities, considering the context. This allows to have a better
holistic understanding of the problems of life, while the students propose
creative and innovative solutions, and the evaluation is a space for reflection
on their learning and the aspects that should be improved (Bain, 2007;
Rodríguez & Naranjo, 2016). In order to develop innovative teaching
practices and approaches to creative learning, it is crucial that the training
process prepares new teachers to become reflective professionals able to discern
how a teaching method or activity can activate creativity in their students
(Kampylis, Bocconi & Punie, 2012). So, today, it is a challenge for teachers
to learn new ways to manage the classroom and encourage students to learn based
on inquiry. But in order to achieve this, it is necessary to have high-quality
training processes that are supported by the change of mentality and the
student-teacher interaction that the teaching requires and allows them to
encourage scientific inquiry in the classroom (Rodríguez, Chicaiza ,Granda,
Reinoso & Aguirre, 2017).
Elmore (2010) indicates that the goal is not only to improve the practices and
performance, but to "teach people working in the organization to think and
act on learning for continuous improvement" (p.138). The changes that occur
in the educational center depend on what teachers do and think they believe, as
described by Stoll and Fink (1999):
-
We
know where we are going: It is important that there are shared goals
throughout the staff of teachers and by the educational community as a
whole. To achieve this, dialogue is necessary: it has been shown that the
centers where teachers debate more frequently about teaching problems and
the ways of solving are better prepared to face improvement processes.
-
We
must all succeed: The program belongs to everyone, which implies that it is
necessary to reach a collective commitment to achieve it.
-
We
can do it better: The idea of continuous improvement must permeate all the
actions of the center. One of the ills of our teachers, more generalized
than it would be desirable, is complacency, thinking that nothing can be
done to improve.
-
Everyone
must learn, learn is a matter for everyone: There are two key elements: the
teacher training and the organizational learning. Teachers are characterized
for being permanent apprentices; it is not possible to improve a center
without everyone’s effort in this sense. Likewise, the center, as a living
organism, learns from its past experiences. It's all about taking advantage
of that learning.
-
We
learn by trying something new: The center must take risks; making decisions
for improvement is making mistakes, but without that risk you cannot move
forward.
-
We
think better together: The teaching work should be a team work. And not only
because it is essential the coordination between subjects, classrooms and
grades or courses but because the work, when is done among several, is
enriching for all and of a better quality. Therefore, it is necessary to
structure the schools as communities, by transforming the individualistic
school culture into a culture of collaboration, which is seen as a device to
learn and solve problems, build cooperation in school or a path of
professional development of its members.
-
We
feel good together: In order to refer to the quality of the relations
between the members of the educational community, we technically speak about
the "climate" of the classroom or the center. It must be
considered that with good relations a person (a teacher in this case) works
better.
In the study carried out by Rodríguez (2015), it is stated that the teacher’s
training is fundamental for the implementation of innovation processes in the
center, due to the following:
-
Training
to innovate is equivalent to learning. Training to introduce changes and
improvements in the teaching and learning process; preparing to create means
having the necessary skills, through continuous training, that enables
permanent professional improvement (De la Torre, 1997; Gather, 2004).
Training for uncertainty, provisionality and control against failure, must
be an essential training content in the training of teachers interested in
innovation and change, so that it is not discomfort and discouragement what
prevents permanent initiatives towards improvement to be carried out (Poncet
& González, 2010).
-
The
educational change depends on what teachers do and think about classrooms
[...] and schools (Fullan, 2002). Teachers are involved in processes of
continuous training and networking, which allows them to develop better
processes of innovation and improvement at school (Sánchez & Murillo,
2010)
-
The
teachers are the main actors for a quality education, since they are the
"agents of change and recipients of it" (De la Torre 1997: 28). A
motivated teacher participates actively in the processes of permanent
formation and has, at the same time, an opportunity for their professional
development.
-
If
the educational center has a policy for institutional innovation, it
contributes to the development of efficient processes of ongoing formation
and this means that: teachers better carry out orientation and mentoring
processes with their students; Have greater mastery of the planning of the
teaching considering the different contexts and groups of students; Have a
better performance in the teaching and learning processes and contribute to
an optimal functioning of the center.
-
It
contributes to the generation of a collaborative and networked learning and
working culture (Fundación Telefónica, 2016, Murillo & Krichesky,
2014).
Conclusions
Innovations should consider that teachers are a fundamental pillar for all
educational change so the following should be considered:
-
Change
in education is only possible when teachers are motivated, assume their role
and involved in this process.
-
To
professionalize the teaching staff that participates in the processes of
innovation and change, which allows him to understand scientifically and
pedagogically what he wants to change. This will contribute to have a
trained and willing to change team of teachers (Ministry of Education,
2011). And they affect the deep aspects of the teaching - learning process,
where the student develops the interest in creating new knowledge to solve
problems and has the capacity to learn for himself and apply his knowledge
in new situations (Wagner, 2013).
-
The
teacher’s stability is a positive factor that has an impact on any change
process.
-
To
foster a positive climate where teachers work collaboratively and generate
networks of professionals.
Bibliography
-
Abad,
M., Benito, P., Giménez, F. & Robles, J. (2013). Fundamentos
pedagógicos de la enseñanza comprensiva del deporte: Una revisión de la
literatura. Cultura, Ciencia y Deporte, 8, 23, 137-146.
-
Anderson,
T.& Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-based research: A decade of progress in
education research? Educational researcher, 41(1), 16-25.
-
Aramendi,
P. (2010a). La innovación educativa en Cantabria: calidad, equidad y
apertura a la comunidad. Profesorado. Revista de curriculum y formación
del profesorado. 14 (1), 153-170.
-
Aramendi,
P. (2010b). La innovación educativa en el País Vasco: inclusión, equidad
e integración europea. Profesorado. Revista de curriculum y formación
del profesorado. 14 (1), 135-152.
-
Arencibia,
J. & Moreno, J. (2010). La innovación educativa en España desde la
perspectiva de grupos de discusión: el caso de la Comunidad Autónoma de
Canarias. Profesorado. Revista de curriculum y formación del
profesorado. 14 (1), 191-214.
-
Bain,
K. (2007). Lo que hacen los mejores profesores universitarios.
Segunda edición. Barcelona: Palacios.
-
Blanco,
R. (2006). La escuela como centro de la innovación educativa.
Recuperado de
http://cedoc.infd.edu.ar/upload/La_escuela_como_centro_de_innovacion.pdf
-
Bolívar,
A. (2009). De “la escuela no importa” a la escuela como unidad base de
mejora. Revista Punto Edu, 15, 28-33. Recuperado de
http://www.cipes.org/articulos/1115%20-%20De%20la%20escuela.pdf
-
Bolívar,
A. (2015). Construir localmente la capacidad de mejora: Liderazgo
pedagógico y Comunidad Profesional. XIII Congreso Nacional de
Investigación Educativa, Chihuahua, México, 16 al 20 de noviembre.
-
Carbonell,
J. (2001) La aventura de innovar. El cambio en la escuela. Segunda
edición. Madrid: Ediciones Morata, S.L.
-
Castillo,
P. & De Benito, B. (2008). Cambios, novedades y procesos de innovación.
En J. Salinas (Cord.). Innovación Educativa y Uso de las Tic. (pp.
31-42). Sevilla: J. De Haro Artes Gráficas S.L. Recuperado de
http://dspace.unia.es/bitstream/handle/10334/2524/innovacioneduc2008.pdf?sequence=1
-
Castro,
A. & Martinez, L. (2016). The Role of Collaborative Action Research in
Teachers’ Professional Development. PROFILE, 18, 1, 39-54.
-
Commission
of the European Communities (2007). Improving the quality of teacher
education. Communication from the commission to the Council and the European
Parliament 3.8.2007. Brussels. Recuperado de
http://www.ond.vlaanderen.be/hogeronderwijs/leraar/bestanden/nota_lerarenopleiding_ministers2007.pdf
-
Company,
G., Gómez, L. & Perandones, T. (2009). La formación del profesorado
como factor decisivo de la excelencia educativa. En L. Gómez y G.
Company (Coord.), Propuestas de diseño, desarrollo e innovaciones
curriculares y metodología en el EEES. (pp. 7-26). Universidad de
Alicante: Marfil. Recuperado de
http://rua.ua.es/dspace/bitstream/10045/13199/1/PROPUESTAS%20CAP.%201.pdf
-
De
la Torre, S. (1997). Innovación educativa. I. El proceso de innovación.
Madrid: Editorial Dykinson, S.L.
-
De
Souza, J. et al. (2008) ¿Quo Vadis, Transformación Institucional? La
innovación de la innovación, del cambio de las cosas al cambio de las
personas que cambian las cosas. Recuperado de
http://www.ts.ucr.ac.cr/binarios/osadia/osadia-00001.pdf.
-
Escudero,
J. (2014). Avances y retos en la promoción de la innovación en los centros
educativos. Educar, 50, 101-150.
-
Fullan,
M. (2002). Los nuevos significados del cambio en la educación.
España: Octaedro.
-
Fundación
Telefónica. (2016). TOP 100. Innovaciones Educativas 2016. Educar para
la Sociedad Digital. Madrid. Recuperado de
https://www.fundaciontelefonica.com/arte_cultura/publicaciones-listado/pagina-item-publicaciones/itempubli/541/
-
Gairín,
J (2003). Gestión Organizativa. San Salvador: Algier's Impresores.
-
Gairín,
J., Armengol, C. & Muñoz, J. (2010). La innovación educativa en las
comunidades autónomas de Cataluña y Aragón. Profesorado. Revista de
curriculum y formación del profesorado. 14 (1), 215-236.
-
García,
R. (2005). Innovación, cultura y poder en las instituciones educativas. La
complejidad en el cambio de educación. Educar 35, 11-27.
-
Gather,
M. (2004). Innovar en el seno de la institución escolar. Barcelona:
Graó, de IRIF, SL.
-
Education,
A., & Mean, W. D. I. (2013). Affective education and the affective
domain: Implications for instructional-design theories and models.
Instructional-design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional
theory, 2(1992), 485.
-
Elmore,
R. (2010). Mejorando la escuela desde la sala de clases. Santiago de
Chile: Salesianos Impresores S.A.
-
Hargreaves,
A. & Fullan, M. (2014). Capital profesional. Transformar la
enseñanza en cada escuela. Madrid: Ediciones Morata.
-
Hopkins,
D. (2008). Hacia una buena escuela. Experiencias y lecciones. Chile:
Quebecor World Chile.
-
Kampylis,
P., Bocconi, S. & Punie, Y. (2012). Fostering innovative pedagogical
practices through online networks: the case of eTwinning. En J. Valtanen, E.
Berki, M. Ruohonen, J. Uhomoibhi, M. Ross, & G. Staples (Eds.),
Education Matters - Inspire XVII (pp. 17–28). Tampere (FI): University
of Tampere.
-
López,
J. & Lavié, J. (2010). Liderazgo para sostener procesos de innovación
en la escuela. Profesorado. Revista de curriculum y formación del
profesorado. 14 (1), 71- 92.
-
López,
J. (2010). Sostenibilidad de la innovación en los centros escolares: sus
bases institucionales. Revista de curriculum y formación del
profesorado. 14 (1), 9-28.
-
Marcelo,
C., Mayor, C. & Gallego, B. (2010). Innovación educativa en España
desde el punto de vista de sus protagonistas. Profesorado. Revista de
curriculum y formación del profesorado. 14 (1), 111-134.
-
Margalef,
L. & Arenas, A. (2006). ¿Qué entendemos por innovación educativa? A
propósito del desarrollo curricular. Perspectiva Educacional, 47,
13-31.
-
Ministerio
de Educación (2011). Estudio sobre la innovación educativa en España.
España: Grafos, S.A.
-
Ministerio
de Educación (2017). Buenas prácticas educativas exitosas y/o
innovadoras. Quito. Recuperado de
http://www.educarecuador.gob.ec/anexos/Correo_Docentes_para_identificar_Buenas_Practicas_Educativas.pdf
-
Moreno,
M. G. (2000). Formación de docentes para la innovación educativa. Sinéctica,
17, 24-32
-
Murillo,
J. (2003). El movimiento teórico práctico de mejora de la escuela.
Algunas lecciones aprendidas para transformar los centros docentes.
Revista Electrónica Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en
Educación, 1 (2I), 1-22.
-
Murillo,
J. & Krichesky, G. (2012). El Proceso de Cambio Escolar. Una Guía para
Impulsar y Sostener la Mejora de las Escuelas. Revista Iberoamericana
sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación,10 (1), 26-43.
-
Murillo,
J. & Krichesky, G. (2014). Mejora de la Escuela: Medio siglo de
lecciones aprendidas. Revista Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y
Cambio en Educación, 13(1), 69-102.
-
Murillo,
J. & Muñoz, M. (Cords.) (2002). La mejora de la Escuela. Barcelona:
Ediciones Octaedro, S .L.
-
Ortega,
P. et. al. (2007). Modelo de innovación educativa. Un marco para la
formación y el desarrollo de una cultura de la innovación. RIED, 10
(1), 145-173.
-
Poncet,
M. & González, R. (2010). Innovar no admite el imperativo. Profesorado.
Revista de curriculum y formación del profesorado. 14 (1), 237-250.
-
Pont,
B., Nusche, D. & Moorman, H. (2009). Mejorar el liderazgo escolar.
Volumen 1: política y práctica. Recuperado de
https://www.oecd.org/edu/school/44374937.pdf
-
Real
Academia Española (2014). Diccionario de la Lengua Española. Edición
Tricentenario. Recuperado de http://dle.rae.es/?id=Lgx0cfV
-
Reynolds,
D. et al. (1997). Las escuelas eficaces. Claves para mejorar la
enseñanza. Madrid: Santillana, S.A.
-
Riesco,
M. (2012).Cómo generar proyectos universitarios innovadores, ilusionantes y
duraderos. En A. de la Herrán & J. Paredes (Cords.), Promover el
cambio pedagógico en la universidad.(pp. 75-98).Madrid: Ediciones
Pirámide.
-
Ríos,
D. (2009). Características personales y profesionales de profesores
innovadores. Revista Latinoamericana de Estudios Educativos, 39
(1-2), 153-169.
-
Rodríguez,
A. (2015). La formación inicial y permanente de los docentes de
enseñanza no universitaria del Distrito Metropolitano de Quito y su
influencia en los procesos de enseñanza y aprendizaje, la evaluación
institucional, el funcionamiento, la innovación y la mejora de los centros
educativos. (Tesis doctoral inédita). Universidad del País Vasco,
España.
-
Rodríguez,
F., Chicaiza, L., Granda, V., Reinoso, P. & Aguirre, A. (2017). ¿La
indagación científica contribuye a un aprendizaje auténtico en los
estudiantes? Lecturas: Educación Física y Deportes. Buenos
Aires, Año 21, Nº 224, Enero. http://www.efdeportes.com/efd224/la-indagacion-cientifica-contribuye-a-un-aprendizaje.htm
-
Rodríguez,
F. & Naranjo, J. (2016). El aprendizaje basado en problemas: una
oportunidad para aprender. Lecturas Educación Física y
Deportes. Buenos Aires, Año 21, Nº 221, Octubre. http://www.efdeportes.com/efd221/el-aprendizaje-basado-en-problemas.htm
-
Rodríguez,
F., Pozuelos, F. & García, F. (2012). Cuando el cambio llega a la
escuela. Estudio de casos sobre los procesos de innovación educativa. Revista
Electrónica de Investigación y Docencia (REID), 8, 117-141.
-
Salinas,
J. (2004). Innovación docente y uso de las TIC en la enseñanza
universitaria.Revista de Universidad y Sociedad del Conocimiento (RUSC).
1 (1), 1-16. Recuperado de https://www.uoc.edu/rusc/dt/esp/salinas1104.pdf
-
Salinas,
J. (2008). Innovación Educativa y Uso de las Tic. Sevilla: J. De
Haro Artes Gráficas S.L. Recuperado de
http://dspace.unia.es/bitstream/handle/10334/2524/innovacioneduc2008.pdf?sequence=1
-
Salinas,
B. & Cotillas, C. (2010). Innovación y cultura colaborativa en un
centro de educación especial. Profesorado. Revista de curriculum y
formación del profesorado. 14 (1), 291-302.
-
Sánchez,
J. (2010). Cómo realizar una revisión sistemática y un
meta-análisis. Aula Abierta, 38, 2, 53-64.
-
Sánchez
J., & Botella, J. (2010). Revisiones sistemáticas y metaanálisis:
Herramientas para la práctica profesional. Papeles del
Psicólogo, 31,1, 7-17.
-
Sánchez,
M. & Murillo, P. (2010). Estepa Innovación educativa en España desde
la perspectiva de grupos de discusión. Profesorado. Revista de
curriculum y formación del profesorado. 14 (1), 172-189.
-
Santizo,
C. (2009). Mejorar el liderazgo escolar. Reporte del contexto mexicano.
México. Recuperado de https://www.oecd.org/edu/school/44906121.pdf
-
Sepúlveda,
C. & Murillo, J. (2012). El Origen de los procesos de mejora de la
escuela. Un estudio cualitativo en 5 escuelas chilenas. Revista
Iberoamericana sobre Calidad, Eficacia y Cambio en Educación, 10 (3),
6-24.
-
Shapiro,
H., Haahr, J. H., Bayer, I., & Boekholt, P. (2007). Background Paper
on Innovation and Education. Prepared by the Danish Technological
Institute and Technopolis, for the European Commission, DG Education &
Culture in the context of a planned Green Paper on innovation. Recuperado de
http://bit.ly/14KkFsM
-
Stoll,
L. y Fink, D. (1999). Para cambiar nuestras escuelas. Reunir la eficacia
y la mejora. Barcelona: Octaedro.
-
UNESCO
(2016). Innovación educativa. Perú. Recuperado de
http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0024/002470/247005s.pdf
-
Vaillant,
D. & Marcelo, C. (2015). El ABC y D de la formación docente. Madrid:
Narcea.
-
Wagner,
T. (2013). Crear innovadores. La formación de los jóvenes que
cambiarán el mundo. Bogotá: Carvajal.
-
Zabalza,
M. & Zabalza, A. (2012). Innovación y cambio en las instituciones
educativas. Rosario: Homo Sapiens Ediciones.
Another articles in English
|
|
|
EFDeportes.com, Revista Digital · Año 22 · N° 228 | Buenos Aires,
Mayo de 2017
Lecturas: Educación Física y Deportes - ISSN 1514-3465 - © 1997-2017 Derechos reservados
|
