The Innovators

Terry O'banion, Laura E. Weidner, Cynthia D. Wilson
{"title":"The Innovators","authors":"Terry O'banion, Laura E. Weidner, Cynthia D. Wilson","doi":"10.1201/9780429280542-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"As we approach the second decade of the new millennium, there is a renaissance of innovation in education, a resurgence of interest and experimentation that begs for analysis and review. To that end, the League for Innovation in the Community College proposed to conduct a national study on the nature of innovation in the community college using recipients of its Innovation of the Year award from 1999 through 2008 as a data set. With funding from MetLife Foundation, researchers examined these innovations and explored the perspectives of the winners of these awards. In September 2009, a survey created by the researchers with assistance from a focus group, field-tested on a sample of winners not included in the project, and vetted by a National Advisory Committee was distributed electronically to the 400 award winners; 117 respondents returned surveys for a return rate of 29%. In addition to the survey, more than 40 of the award winners were interviewed using interview questions created by the researchers and vetted by the national advisory committee. The full report and all project findings can be accessed at www.league.org/natureofinnovation. In the present article the authors report only on the survey of the Innovation of the Year Award winners, including who the innovators are, how they work. and why they choose to innovate. Introduction In a time of social and economic ferment and increasing calls from American society for the community college to play a role in addressing current challenges, innovation is often cited as one of the great strengths of American culture and of the community college in particular. In her keynote address at the April 20, 2010, annual convention of the American Association of Community Colleges, Melinda Gates said, \"The task ahead of you is to innovate at the necessary scale, so that your innovations have an impact on the entire community college system of more than 1,000 institutions and six million students\" (Gates, 2010). The call from Gates to innovate is echoed in numerous recent documents and statements from foundations, governmental agencies, research reports, and policy leaders. The call is based in the belief that the community college can respond to the current social and economic challenges in innovative ways, and community colleges will respond to that call because innovation is in their DNA. The community college itself is an innovation, an American social invention, radically different from the English-based four-year college and the German-based university that comprise the higher education landscape in the U.S. Additionally, the community college has become a crucible of innovation, experimenting and adapting to keep its promise to provide a second chance to underprepared and underrepresented students who never dreamed of college before there was a community college. But the college itself is not the innovator. The innovators are the faculty, administrators, and staff who were attracted to the philosophy and the programs of the community college as a reflection of their own deepest held values. They signed on to the community college to make a difference, and when they realized they had taken on the toughest tasks in all of higher education, they did not retreat. Indeed, in the face of overwhelming challenge they mustered their creative forces and became innovators. The National Study on Innovation Since 1982, the League for Innovation in the Community College has been recognizing the most outstanding innovators in its member colleges with the Innovator of the Year Award. League membership includes over 750 member colleges representing every state and every kind of technical/community college both urban and rural, large and small. Each member institution may submit an innovation for this prestigious award. Criteria for the awards include Quality, Creativity, Timeliness, Efficiency, Cost Effectiveness, and Replication. Faculty committees select the winners based on a review of applications from interested individuals and teams whose innovations meet the criteria. …","PeriodicalId":147861,"journal":{"name":"Vintage Games 2.0","volume":"4 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2010-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Vintage Games 2.0","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1201/9780429280542-1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

As we approach the second decade of the new millennium, there is a renaissance of innovation in education, a resurgence of interest and experimentation that begs for analysis and review. To that end, the League for Innovation in the Community College proposed to conduct a national study on the nature of innovation in the community college using recipients of its Innovation of the Year award from 1999 through 2008 as a data set. With funding from MetLife Foundation, researchers examined these innovations and explored the perspectives of the winners of these awards. In September 2009, a survey created by the researchers with assistance from a focus group, field-tested on a sample of winners not included in the project, and vetted by a National Advisory Committee was distributed electronically to the 400 award winners; 117 respondents returned surveys for a return rate of 29%. In addition to the survey, more than 40 of the award winners were interviewed using interview questions created by the researchers and vetted by the national advisory committee. The full report and all project findings can be accessed at www.league.org/natureofinnovation. In the present article the authors report only on the survey of the Innovation of the Year Award winners, including who the innovators are, how they work. and why they choose to innovate. Introduction In a time of social and economic ferment and increasing calls from American society for the community college to play a role in addressing current challenges, innovation is often cited as one of the great strengths of American culture and of the community college in particular. In her keynote address at the April 20, 2010, annual convention of the American Association of Community Colleges, Melinda Gates said, "The task ahead of you is to innovate at the necessary scale, so that your innovations have an impact on the entire community college system of more than 1,000 institutions and six million students" (Gates, 2010). The call from Gates to innovate is echoed in numerous recent documents and statements from foundations, governmental agencies, research reports, and policy leaders. The call is based in the belief that the community college can respond to the current social and economic challenges in innovative ways, and community colleges will respond to that call because innovation is in their DNA. The community college itself is an innovation, an American social invention, radically different from the English-based four-year college and the German-based university that comprise the higher education landscape in the U.S. Additionally, the community college has become a crucible of innovation, experimenting and adapting to keep its promise to provide a second chance to underprepared and underrepresented students who never dreamed of college before there was a community college. But the college itself is not the innovator. The innovators are the faculty, administrators, and staff who were attracted to the philosophy and the programs of the community college as a reflection of their own deepest held values. They signed on to the community college to make a difference, and when they realized they had taken on the toughest tasks in all of higher education, they did not retreat. Indeed, in the face of overwhelming challenge they mustered their creative forces and became innovators. The National Study on Innovation Since 1982, the League for Innovation in the Community College has been recognizing the most outstanding innovators in its member colleges with the Innovator of the Year Award. League membership includes over 750 member colleges representing every state and every kind of technical/community college both urban and rural, large and small. Each member institution may submit an innovation for this prestigious award. Criteria for the awards include Quality, Creativity, Timeliness, Efficiency, Cost Effectiveness, and Replication. Faculty committees select the winners based on a review of applications from interested individuals and teams whose innovations meet the criteria. …
创新者
在我们即将进入新千年的第二个十年之际,教育领域出现了创新的复兴,需要分析和回顾的兴趣和实验的复兴。为此,社区学院创新联盟提议对社区学院创新的本质进行一项全国性研究,使用1999年至2008年的年度创新奖获得者作为数据集。在大都会人寿基金会的资助下,研究人员对这些创新进行了研究,并探讨了获奖者的观点。2009年9月,在一个焦点小组的协助下,研究人员创建了一份调查报告,对不包括在项目中的获奖者样本进行了实地测试,并由国家咨询委员会审查,以电子方式分发给了400名获奖者;117名受访者回复了调查,回复率为29%。除调查外,40多位获奖者还接受了由研究人员设计并经国家咨询委员会审查的访谈问题的采访。完整的报告和所有项目发现可在www.league.org/natureofinnovation上访问。在本文中,作者只报告了年度创新奖获奖者的调查,包括创新者是谁,他们是如何工作的。以及他们为什么选择创新。在一个社会和经济动荡的时代,美国社会越来越多地呼吁社区学院在应对当前挑战中发挥作用,创新经常被认为是美国文化的一大优势,尤其是社区学院。在2010年4月20日美国社区学院协会年会的主题演讲中,梅琳达·盖茨说:“摆在你们面前的任务是在必要的规模上进行创新,这样你们的创新就会对整个社区学院系统的1000多所院校和600万名学生产生影响”(盖茨,2010)。盖茨对创新的呼吁在基金会、政府机构、研究报告和政策领导人最近的许多文件和声明中得到了呼应。这一呼吁是基于这样一种信念,即社区大学能够以创新的方式应对当前的社会和经济挑战,社区大学将会响应这一呼吁,因为创新是它们的DNA。社区学院本身是一种创新,一种美国社会的发明,与构成美国高等教育格局的以英语为基础的四年制大学和以德国为基础的大学截然不同。此外,社区学院已经成为创新、实验和适应的熔炉,以履行其承诺,为那些在社区学院出现之前从未梦想过上大学的准备不足和未被充分代表的学生提供第二次机会。但学院本身并不是创新者。创新者是那些被社区学院的理念和项目所吸引的教师、管理人员和员工,他们认为这反映了他们自己最深刻的价值观。他们签约社区学院是为了有所作为,当他们意识到自己承担了所有高等教育中最艰巨的任务时,他们没有退缩。事实上,面对巨大的挑战,他们聚集了自己的创造力,成为了革新者。自1982年以来,社区学院创新联盟一直为其成员学院中最杰出的创新者颁发年度创新者奖。联盟成员包括750多个成员学院,代表了每个州和各种技术/社区学院,包括城市和农村,大小。每个成员机构都可以为这个著名的奖项提交一项创新。评奖标准包括质量、创意、及时性、效率、成本效益和可复制性。学院委员会根据对创新符合标准的感兴趣的个人和团队的申请进行审查,选出获奖者。…
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信