European Journal of Education Studies
ISSN: 2501 - 1111 (on-line)
ISSN-L: 2501 - 1111 (print)
Available on-line at: www.oapub.org/edu
10.5281/zenodo.52251
Volume 1│Issue 2│2016
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER
LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
Violet Kafwa Nabwire
Department of Curriculum Instruction and Educational Media
Moi University, Kenya
Abstract:
Today s graduates are engaged with the demands of the current knowledge age the
skills needed to succeed in live and the workplace in 21st century. This paradigm shift
coupled with high demand for university education puts higher learning institutions in
a crisis situation due to: enrolment pressure against static resources; demand for 21st
century competencies in knowledge, skills and attitudes that correspond with needs of
contemporary workplace, and the economic inflation. In Kenya, tuition costs have been
escalating beyond the management of students from the average income families thus
putting the students in significant debts of fee arrears, and declining completion rates.
Also the universities are expanding drastically through opening of new satellite
campuses all over the country to meet demand for higher education whereas; both
human and teaching resources continually remain constraints in existing and new
campuses. To arrest this trend, the universities are struggling to re-invent themselves to
reduce costs whilst improving quality, utilizing the minimum resources, and increasing
flexibility for students. Innovative pedagogy is a responsive system to address these
growing demands while efficiently utilizes the limited resources. In this context, new
technologies have enormous potential to effect changes and enable universities to meet
broader range of learners needs. The educators and policy makers have a duty to
embrace the transformation. This concept paper therefore is informed by constructivism
and ACTION models to base the argument on reinventions in Higher Learning
Institution. The focus of the paper is on: impact of innovative pedagogy in learning,
acceptance rate by the universities, implication for the future, and the challenges of
using new pedagogies.
Copyright © The Author(s). All Rights Reserved
Published by Open Access Publishing Group ©2015.
189
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
Keywords: innovative pedagogy, higher learning, constraints, constructivist and
ACTIONS models, demand for higher education, flexibility for students, quality
education
Introduction
In recent years, the pedagogies associated with teaching and learning in higher
education settings have been changed by increased use of ICTs as a means of energizing
student learning (CfBT, 2012). It is therefore important for the university establishments
to institute a recognized strategy, to valorize teaching and motivate and reward the
professions involved in teaching activities, in order to bring teaching and research back
into balance. The higher education sector is a prominent sector in introducing
innovative approaches to the development of 21st century skills and Knowledge.
Educational institutions and universities need to respond to the cycle of innovation and
adapt their organization and pedagogies to serve: increasingly heterogeneous student
profile, improve quality of teaching and learning, meet increasing student enrolment
rates and maximize the utilization of available constraint resources (CfBT, ibid). The
valorization of university teaching revolves around pedagogical development support
programs or symposia (Jeanpierre, 2005). Innovative pedagogy is focused on higher
education teaching excellence. It provides mechanisms to network with like- minded
educators, gives opportunities to expand one s understanding and motivation for
learner-centered instruction (Nabwire, 2014). In this time of economic enrolment
challenge, it is essential to maintain the highest standards for institutions of higher
learning and continue to increase the effectiveness of instruction and the depth of
student learning as mitigation to existing constraints especially on cost effectiveness,
efficient delivery, flexible learning, professional practices and creativity. These
innovative approaches can be informed by the constructivism and ACTIONS models
(Bates, 1990; Piaget, 1985; Dewey, 1897; Syomwene, et al 2015). To contextualize the key
terms, this paper adapts the following operational definitions:
Pedagogy is the study of being a teacher or process of education. It explores the
process by which society deliberately transmits its accumulated knowledge, skills and
values from one generation to the other. The major pedagogical question is how to
enhance student learning and meet the needs of various types of learners hence the use
of innovative pedagogy in which the educator reinvents the principles and practices
education to make learning more responsive to learners needs thus the essence of
humanizing pedagogy (Salazar, 2013). Innovative pedagogy has the responsibility to
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
190
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
prepare knowledgeable citizens, critical thinker, creative, problem solver, manage and
analyze information (Bozalek, 2013; UNESCO; 2015)
Innovation is a new idea or a further development of an existing product,
process or method that is applied in a specific context with an intention to create a value
addition (Kirkland & Sutch, 2009). The paper weaves an argument on the innovative
pedagogy at the universities underpinned by ACTIONS model in the following
perspectives.
ACTIONS and Constructivist Models in Innovative Pedagogy
Instructional media technology (IMT) suggests factors to consider when using
instructional media technology in order to boost efficient teaching and learning.
According to Bates (1990), ACTIONS are short form for the explanation of a set of
fundamental responsibilities to inform the choice and use of instructional media
technology (IMT) in classroom teaching context.
Teachers and students are the focus in any teaching situation core players in
instruction hence any model has to account the interaction between teachers, learners,
and the learning process. The ACTIONS model therefore depicts that the presentation
of the content within a given teaching environment influence the quality and depth of
learning. Thus there are variables which influence both the presentation of the subject
and the learning environment, such as the type of IMT used, infrastructure in place for
use of IMT, competence of teacher educators in the use of IMT, institutional
management strategies to support IMT and other factors may affect the effective use of
IMT. All these variables are considered in the ACTIONS model. The theoretical
formulation of the ACTIONS model focuses on making decisions about the use of
educational technology and planning involved (Bates, 2003) gives a theoretical basis for
the arguments on the use of educational technologies in higher learning. The decisions
that will be made on use of innovative pedagogy fully rest with educators and policy
makers in the universities who have a duty to reinvent the existing environment to
accommodate the use of the innovative pedagogy.
The Constructivist model (Dewey, 1897; Piaget, 1985; Meyer et al, 1939) on the
other hand fits into basing the arguments on best practices in classroom processes at
any educational level. The model draws on holistic education, developmental modes of
growth and learning, human potential movement, creative student-driven learning,
lifelong learning and relearning, experiential and inquiry based learning, ethical and
community based learning. The approach promotes learner- centered learning and
emphasis on learner active involvement in construction of knowledge by;
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
191
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
communicating, inquiring, conceptualizing, reasoning and problem solving. It
integrates differentiated instruction, making demands to account for individual
differences and the needs of individual students (Isikoglu, 2009). The teacher on the
other hand functions more of a facilitator who coaches, mediates, prompts, and helps
students, evaluates and assess students understanding and learning.
The reinvention in higher education (HE) teaching vary and can easily address
many challenges in these institutions such as the surging student enrolments, constraint
facilities, increased incompletion rates, dropping quality of teaching/learning, and
inflexibility in learning (Nabwire, 2014; Bates, 2003). These varied innovative
approaches revolves around use of computers (web, internet, CAL, CBL, CMC),
blended learning for independent and collaborative learning, teaching/learning
intended
to
develop
skills
(personal,
transferable,
key,
core,
employable,
communication and problem solving), team projects, group learning (cooperation and
collaboration), student presentations (individual or group), interactive seminars or
lectures, work-based learning, resource-based learning (packages, booklets), distance
and open learning and peer tutoring- mentoring and assessment. Adaption of these
approaches promotes interaction of learner-learner, and learner-teacher that is crucial in
any learning environment. The interaction is facilitated by use of resources that include;
Weblog, Edu-games, Virtual worlds, and video communication among others (Mwaka,
et at (eds), 2014; McGill, et al, 1995; and Vanbuel, 1998).
Further collaborative learning is also implied in innovative pedagogy whereby
the learner is offered opportunities through activities that help him reach the intended
objective(s) through use of similar resources like Digital archives, Virtual classrooms,
Social software, social networking, and Portfolio (Nabwire, 2014). The introduction of
these technologies in classroom definitely leads to flexibility in learning that is
acceptable humanising pedagogy rather than the pedagogy for the oppressed that is
teacher-centred, rigid, limiting learning, and favours real time learning - synchronous
rather than asynchronous (Vanbuel, 1998). The Asynchronous learning will be more
enterprising as is more flexible, efficient with limited resources, motivating and adapted
to modern technology, an approach that addresses 21st century learners needs ICWE,
2012). The Martini (Vanbul, ibid) Model, table1 illustrates this approach with respective
resources and learner engagement in learning activities – see table 1.
Teachers should equip students with the skills that will enable them to be
successful and productive citizens. This can be made possible by implementing
innovation pedagogies (Republic of Kenya, 2010). It favors ICT integration process that
promotes students learning in a collaborative way and encourages students expression
and creativity trying to take advantage of the potential offered by computers and other
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
192
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
ICT devices. This thinking diverts from traditional and education models, which
focuses on passive learning in a transmission teaching strategy (Kaplun, 2009; Nabwire,
2014).
The aim of innovation pedagogy is to generate environment in which know-how
inspired competitive advantage can be created by combining different kinds of knowhow. When utilized, this edge provides opportunities for the whole society, as
innovation and sharpening skills measures. Thus, innovation pedagogy is key in
introducing new competitive advantages via know-how. In a multidisciplinary
environment, it is possible to evoke regional innovations and increase entrepreneurship
through research and development (Kantola, 2012))
In having social learning theories as a background, innovation pedagogy links
university work together with the regional needs emphasizing the meaning of
innovation competencies without losing focus on the study specific skills students must
possess.
Innovation
pedagogy
emphasizes
the
meaning
of
teamwork
and
multidisciplinary groups, as well as internationalization as main sources of innovations.
Innovation pedagogy is practiced by different activating learning methods such
as hatchery methods that produce study-specific and innovation competencies, and
concurrently serves regional, national and international operators ensuring direct
societal benefits (Lehto et al., 2011; Penttilä, 2013). It is a learning environment where
students of different fields are daily in contact with each other and offer new interfaces
for working. Such surroundings are known to be best when innovations are utilized. In
addition, an innovative approach to teaching and learning are also needed as well as
enthusiasm for trying new methods. In the context of innovation pedagogy, innovations
are seen as an integral part of the process of constantly improving know-how as well as
generating new sustainable ideas and practices applicable in working life (KairistoMertanen, et al, 2011; Kantola, et al, 2012)
Justification for Using Innovative Pedagogies
Changes in the working life and surrounding global environment necessitate that skills
and attitudes matching the new requirements are consciously and systematically
developed along with the students knowledge bases Cf”T,
Kocharov,
5.
Social and interactive skills, cultural abilities, understanding the prerequisites for
working with customers, quality learning, preparedness for entrepreneurship,
creativity and problem solving skills as well as tolerance for difference and uncertainty
are the kind of attitudes and skills that a future professional should have (KairistoMertanen, 2005; Kairisto-Mertanen, 2007).
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
193
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
Teachers personal commitment to teaching and to their students is basically an
individual s effort intended to improve learning. The innovation pedagogy therefore
aims at enhancing the competence to achieve the objective of learning in all Institutions
of learning (Kettlanen, 2009). Higher education supports the professional growth of an
individual as well as takes into account the world of professionalism to address the
dynamism in professional in contemporary world. This provides quality higher
education, training and professional development to meet the needs of citizens, through
innovative pedagogies like e-learning grounded in use of modern technologies.
Learning is currently moving out of the classroom to learner s environment,
therefore it is important to recognize this paradigm shifts and adapt to the new
demands. Application of innovative pedagogy is creating a more diverse higher
education system by widening access and facilitating lifelong learning. Government
and higher education (HE) providers are increasingly interested in the use of measures
of student engagement, alongside the measurement of student satisfaction as a means
of informing enhancement activities. Student engagement is internationally recognized
as the key indicator to learning gains and student achievement in HE (KairistoMertanen, 2011) as evidenced on high impact pedagogical practices that foster
engagement. But there is a need to promote this further and to direct research into fresh
areas of practice and innovation. Universities are embarking on different pathways to
ensure that their education systems have the capacity to respond effectively and
efficiently to diverse economic and societal demands in a competitive world.
New modes of learning and teaching offer opportunities for reaching out to local
communities and more personalized learning informed by better data. In traditional
lecture hall settings, it is difficult for a teacher to follow the progress of each and every
student. It is impossible to adapt the pace of the course to match individual needs. But
with innovations, data can capture how students engage in the course, interact with
other students and retain concepts over time. It can provide information on the learning
process as opposed to just learning outcomes (Bozalek, 2013; Braskamp, 2006).
Developing educational partnerships is an important element of Kenya s strategy
for cooperation with other parts of the world. Wide availability of quality education
resources and the ability to adapt and customize these materials to specific
circumstances, and languages, is providing a step-change in educational attainment
levels, especially emerging economies. In an increasingly globalized world, and with
the expansion of higher education provision in emerging economies (Kafwa, et al, 2015),
Kenya higher education institutions need to develop a strong brand to ensure they
remain competitive and relevant in attracting students, staff and international partners.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
194
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
Impact of Innovative Pedagogy in Learning
After devolution, Vice Chancellors and principals of universities in Kenya have learnt
to manage a complex and a delicate combination of expectations of the roles of their
institutions both from Kenyan government and devolved administrations. Universities
need to respond to pedagogies that serve increasingly heterogeneous students profiles
and improve the teaching and learning of variety of skills for innovation (Kafwa, ibid;
UNESCO 2015). Across countries and in multiple occupational fields, the institution of
higher education sector is a prominent sector in introducing innovative approaches to
the development of 21st century skills demand. Despite of the fact that the universities
have different governance and leadership, they must work in harmony, and there has to
be a consultative and cooperative relationship. Learners acquire digital skills best when
exposed to ICT at very young age as they increasingly use to explore and exploit the
world of ICT and to craft that into knowledge Republic of Kenya,
Universities
.
Giant
admit most students who are techno savvy therefore the rate of
innovation is high in these universities and students have positive attitude and interest
towards their implementation and use. It offers the students potential to utilize learner centered learning approaches as supported in constructivist teaching principles (Meyer,
1939). These technologies are transformative as they associated with new paradigm.
The Adoption of Innovative pedagogy is transformative change which must
have a positive effect while improving instruction; it does not constitute the solution to
a problem, but demands activity and originality ((Solon, 2007). As universities embrace
the devolved systems of governances, fear abound as to what measures have been put
in place to ensure university and colleges run effectively while it is apparent that
devolution has been to design and decentralize decision making and resources to
various universities. It is indisputable therefore that the universities are not equal in
terms of capacity and thus cannot be expected to grow at the same pace. This has
brought disparity among the graduates from different universities with same courses.
Weak universities need time to run effectively and apply innovative pedagogy. What
emerged instead was transfer pedagogy (Vanbuel, 1998) in which existing approaches
to teaching and learning in higher education were applied to the digital environment.
Here the lecturer remained the expert delivering his content through the
medium of handouts and the lecture methods.
Waves of these technologies, mass production and now computers have brought
creative and disruptive forces that restructured the economy and rippled throughout
social institutions and practices. ICT and knowledge creation have eclipsed
manufacturers as primary productive factor. Many economies have shifted from
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
195
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
provision of material goods and service to the provision of information and knowledge
(Kamakar et al, 2007).). Innovative pedagogies such as e-learning, Computer Assisted
Instruction (CAI) have refocused communication trend, information sharing and
simulation of business processes. They need to adapt to students characteristics and
respond to their development, this is an inherent aspect of pedagogy. Education is not a
service for a customer but an on-going process of transformation of student (Braskamp,
2006)
Innovative pedagogies such as e-learning provides quality enhancement as a
result of shared, high-quality learning materials and more creative and individualized
pedagogical approaches. Students are unique, and so is the way they teach (Mwaka et
al (eds), 2014). Therefore, the teaching tools used in universities and colleges should
cater for individual ways of learning, with the student at the center. Some of the
students learn better and faster with the help of interactive media that incorporate
images, graphics, videos and audio elements than with none. Others will prefer static
text and numbers in different measures. Technology in the classroom can combine all of
these for a personalized learning experience for each student, based on each student s
strengths. As well as improving the effectiveness of learning, such adaptation to
individual needs can also have a significant effect on the reduction of drop-out. The
flexibility inherent in this type of provision can also enable quick adaptability to the
ever-changing needs of the labor force and emerging skills gaps (CfBT, 2012, Kocharov,
2015).
Universities Acceptance of Innovative Pedagogy
It is widely accepted across the international higher education sector that innovative
pedagogy such as e-learning, blended learning, computer based learning, distance and
open learning, student presentation among others are enabled by use of particular ICTs.
The use of ICT in the innovative pedagogy offer students, teaching staff and
institutions, flexibility in terms of time, place and pace at which learning and teaching
may occur (Bates & Pools, 2003). Educators assert that knowledge is no longer
necessarily viewed as being helped by experts whose role is to deliver information to
students. Rather knowledge is viewed as socially constructed and mediated through
many digital and non-digital forms. The use of internet for example in higher education
is increasingly positioned as reshaping the world of knowledge through its socio
technological practices (Hannan, 2005).
In this context, teachers wish will be always how to identify and foster the key
tenants of innovation. If the focus is on producing innovators, not subject matter,
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
196
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
experts, then how might this shift the teaching approach? Key to university success is
innovation but this is never taught in education or at workplace. What is needed are
leadership and talents to strategize and drive innovation. By identifying and fostering
the key tenants of innovations, universities are able to focus on producing instructional
innovators, not subject matter experts (Kitahara, & Hannay, 2008). By shifting our
teaching and learning approaches, it is a matter of risk-taking, curiosity and activity in
instructional activities. Innovative pedagogy is a process of providing a platform for
adjusting our own teaching methodologies to nurture and promote innovation and
creativity (Mwaka et al (eds) 2014; Unesco 2015)
Lecturers have accepted innovative pedagogies up to 85% because it enhances
critical thinking (Kitahara, & Hannay, 2008). Assignment in any content area that
requires students to use information retrieval and evaluation skills is promoting
students practice using critical thinking which is crucial for knowledgeable society
(Gross & Lathem, 2012). Universities are often concerned with issues of student
retention, both in students levels and classroom rates, and the amount of knowledge a
student gains and maintains in a course. There is a general consensus among lecturers
that improving students critical thinking skills is a major goal for institutions of higher
learning. However there are also some disagreements that the educational system has
not performed well in consistently producing critical thinkers. In fact, research suggests
that traditional classroom instruction has little impact on students critical thinking
skills. It is also evident that thinking skills is possible, but requires explicit, deliberate
instruction in critical thinking (Solon, 2007).
Leadership plays an important role in innovation development. However,
attitude and values of the teachers are vital as these increases or decreases the rate at
which it is being used (Bates & Pools, 2003). The innovative pedagogies depend on the
opportunities open to innovators in allowing them to engage in transformational
activities. Studies on use of technology (Ganesan et al.2002; Knight & Twowler, 2001)
demonstrate that teaching and learning depends on institutional policies and academic
leadership. In universities, establishment of educational policies can influence the
importance accorded to teaching. Innovative pedagogies substantially improve student
learning in a situation of interaction and interactivity, it is often described as everything
which is not lecturing and is believed to bring change and reform.
Currently ICT integration has received special emphasis in the education bill
(Republic of Kenya, 2010). The expectation is to see the learning institutions chumming
out highly skilled personnel who are innovators and creators of knowledge. This kind
of graduates will drive the economy using latest technologies competing globally in
production of new knowledge and products. Teachers adapt their instructional
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
197
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
practices and educational systems to be more effective and the reason why they
struggle to innovate instructional media. The role of the teachers have shifted from
being subject matter explore who transmits information to acting as a facilitator of
student learning. Current reforms emphasize teachers develop student s capabilities in
problem solving, teamwork, learning to learn and reflective thinking.
Challenges of Using Innovative Pedagogies
There are many barriers that prevent lecturers from using new pedagogies in the
classroom. The majority of reasons are similar to the barriers preventing learners from
using any type of technology in their learning method. Time constraints, lack of
equipment and the fear of trying something new are some of the problems experienced
by the lecturers in trying to implement innovative pedagogies. There are various
innovative pedagogies that universities can explore to address some of the barriers in
innovative pedagogy (Kirkland, & Sutch 2009). These are new forms of teaching and
learning which can be used to explore and interact with the world, and guide lecturers
and policy makers in productive innovation. Such approaches are numerous yet have
not had a profound influence on education, for example, massive open social learning
that benefits a lot online learning (Campbell, 2012). The main aim is to engage
thousands of students in productive discussions, share experience and build on their
previous knowledge. A challenge to this approach is that these learners typically meet
online for a short period of time.
Within higher education, new technologies have enormous potential to effect
change. They enable universities to meet a broader range of learners needs, adapting
traditional teaching of face to- face to online learning (blended learning) possibilities
that allow individuals to learn anywhere, anytime. They also create openings to engage
in new kinds of collaboration and offer opportunities to distribute resources more
effectively (Vanbuel, 1998). Given the societal and economic potential that can come
from harnessing technological innovation in higher education, it is imperative that
Kenya takes the lead in this arena. But many universities are not yet ready for this
change – and governments have been slow to take the lead. While there are instances of
innovation, the landscape is fragmented, various barriers prevent widespread uptake,
and fully-fledged institutional or national strategies for adopting new modes of
learning and teaching are few and far between (Kirkland, & Sutch 2009).
Innovators take on extra work to learn new skills that may be unpopular with the
other staff. Such innovators take risks with their own careers so long as it can improve
the quality of their teaching. Change in higher education is thus driven by a number of
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
198
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
forces including demands of employers, government policy initiative and attempts by
lecturers to meet changing needs of students and to reflect the changing nature of their
subject matter. On these efforts, there are several opposing forces amongst universities,
within the universities and even within departments (Bates & Pools, 2003). Innovation
in pedagogy only takes place when the teacher feels a great degree of security within
the learning environment/culture that recognizes the need for change and has
encouragement from relevant authorities.
Low esteem of teaching and learning, lack of recognition and interest by
colleagues and people in authority are some of the issues which affect innovation.
Institution or other policies and action plans lagging firm directions that preclude
individual initiative (Hannan, & Silver, 2000). There is excessive bureaucratic procedure
for approval support and resources that the user must undertake in order to access the
media, numerous quality assessment procedures that inhibit risk-taking, yet the current
innovative pedagogy aligns to desirable global trend of a shift from teaching to
learning. It takes on a key position in the fundamental institutional change in higher
education sector to shift to interaction pedagogy.
Implication of the Future
Twenty first century life is marked by rapid and constant change. Our students will be
faced with the need to continually learn to adapt to new contexts, expectations and
technologies throughout their lives. To be successful they will have to know how to
successful navigate shafting careers, learning new jobs, role and relationships in
progression. They will have to transform broken systems and organizations and create
new ones that are more effective, hopefully, and socially just. Today s lecturers must
facilitate the learning process of 21st century student in their quest for personal and
professional growth as well as fulfill growing demands for higher education (Kettunen,
et al 2013).
In Kenya, the entry grade to universities is C+ and above, this has given students
leeway to join universities as privately sponsored students hence rising in population.
To meet this challenge, lecturers must undergo a paradigmatic shift in their view of the
teacher - learner relationship. They must cast off their role of sage on a stagier and don
the new role of servant lecturer one who effectively supports, manages and guides his
students (Hannan, 2005). Their work extends beyond their specific content expertise
because there is greater reliance on course instructor to achieve learning goals. In the
past, it was assumed that effective university lecturers held the qualifications of: content
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
199
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
expertise, engagement in professional activities, remains current in their fields of
experiences and had ability to perform and conduct research (Arreola, 2006).
Today s lecturers are willing to play a greater role in nurturing and shaping their
students personal, professional and academic growth. To do so successfully requires a
paradigmatic shift in their view of appropriate teacher student relations. They must
serve as expert, nurturer, a facilitator of learning and a counselor (Gear, et al, 2009). In
innovative pedagogy, the teacher leads the students academic and professional growth
by providing varying forms of guidance (Braskamp et al., 2006). In this case, the
guidance is tailored towards each individual student s highest priority needs. It also
requires that the focus be shifted to the needs of the students rather than on the
opportunity for the teacher centered stage teaching (Kitahara & Hannay, 2008). Part of
this shift includes switching from teacher centered to learner-centered teaching
methods (Knowles et al., 2011). It is a transformative change which must have a positive
effects whilst innovation allows instruction to be improved leading to citizens who are
knowledgeable. It does not constitute the solution to a problem but demands creativity
and originality (Solon, 2007; Hannan, 2005). The high education in Kenya is monitored
and steered by a Commission for University Education (CUE) to ensure standardization
and quality control at the institutions. The Pedagogical implications are that traditional
approaches may no longer be appropriate modes of engaging with information and
working towards the construction of knowledge in learners.
Certainly application of ICT as one of innovations in HE plays a key role in
facilitating learning and enhancing education. Innovative pedagogy encourages
teachers to share more their expertise and experience in ways beyond the mere
exchange of information. Learning is beyond the mere exchange of information rather is
based on research and new skills which society expects students live. This approach is
rooted in constructivism (Piaget, 1985; Meyer, 1939) in promoting learner centered
approach and an emphasis on communicating, inquiring, conceptualizing, reasoning
and problem solving. Innovative pedagogy is a learning approach focused on the
development of innovative competencies, defining assimilation of knowledge,
production and use in a creative manner that explains innovations. Innovation
competencies are learning outcomes linked to attitudes, knowledge and skills needed
for the successful innovation activities.
Conclusions
Universities need to respond to pedagogies that serve increasingly heterogeneous
students profiles and improve the teaching and learning of variety of skills. Innovative
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
200
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
pedagogy is aligning to global desirable trend of a shift from teaching to learning with
instructors and institutional policy makers taking key position in its implementation. It
is changing roles of the learners and teachers and at the same time reshaping the society
through socio technological practices and working towards the construction of
knowledge and understanding. The educators and policy makers have a professional
duty in pedagogical transformation to shape it for the purpose it stood to provide.
References
1. Bates,A. and Poole, G. (2003). Effective Teaching with Technology in Higher Edu.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Johnwiley and Son
2. Bates, A. (1990). ACTIONS Model in Learning. Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Johnwiley
and Son
3. Arreola, A. R., Theall, M., & Aleamoni, L. M. (2003).Beyond scholarship:
Recognizing the multiple roles of the professoriate. Paper presented at the
Annual Meeting of the AERA. Chicago.
4. Braskamp, L. A., Trautvetter, L. C., & Ward, K. (2006).Putting students first: How
Colleges develop students purposefully. Bolton, MA: Anker.
5. Bozalek,V, Gachago,
D, Alexander, L, Watters, K, Wood, D,
Ivala, E and
Herrington, J (2013). The use of emerging technologies for authentic learning: A
South African study in higher education. British Journal of Educational Technology
44 ( 4 )( 629–638)
6. Campbell, C. (2012)
QAA and UK Higher Education Today. CHEA 2012
International
Seminar
Presentations.http://www.chea.org/pdf/Changing_the_Structure-Campbell.pdf
7. CfBT - Education Trust. (2012). Whole School Improvement Service – Training
Manual- unpublished
8. Dewey, J. (1897). My Pedagogical Creed. School Journal.54.pp.77-80. Retrieved
on Nov 4, 2011 from http://dewey.pragmatism.org/creed.htm
9. Ganesan, R., Edmonds, G. & Spector, M. (2002). The changing nature of
instructional design for networked learning. In Steeples, C. & Jones, C.
(Eds).Networked Learning: Perspectives and Issues. London: Springer-Verlag
10. Gear, M. R., Krumrei, E. J., & Pargament, K. I. (2009). Development of spirituallysensitive intervention for college students experiencing spiritual struggles:
Winding road. Journal of College & Character, X(4), 1-5.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
201
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
11. Gross, M., & Latham, C.
. What s skill go to do with it? Information
literacy skills and self-views of ability among first-year college students. Journal
of the American Society for Information Science and Technology, 63(3), 574-583.
doi: 10.1002/asi.21681
12. Hannan, A & Silver, H. (2000). Innovating in Higher Education: teaching,
learning, and institutional culture. Buckgham, UK: Society for Research into
Higher Education and the Open University Press
13. Hannan, A. (2005). Innovating in higher education: contexts for change in
learning technology. British Journal of Educational Technology, 36 (6), 975-985.
14. ICWE, (2012). ONLINE EDUCA – 18th International Conference on Technology
Supported, Berlin, Learning and Training - Brochure
15. Isikoglu, N., R. Basturk and F. Karaca (2009),
Assessing in-service teachers
instructional beliefs about student-centered education: A Turkish perspective ,
Teaching and Teacher Education, Vol. 25, No. 2, pp. 350-356.
16. Jeanpierre, B., K. Oberhauser and C. Freeman (2005),
Characteristics of
professional development that effect change in secondary science teachers
classroom practices , Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 42, No. 6, pp.
668-690.
17. Kairisto-Mertanen L., Penttilä,T.& Putkonen, A.(2011): Embedding Innovation
Skills in Learning – Developing Cooperation Between Working Life and
Universities of Applied Sciences. In Towards Innovation Pedagogy – A new
approach to teaching and learning for universities of applied sciences. Reports
from Turku University of Applied Sciences nr 100,pp. 11-23.
18. Kairisto-Mertanen, L., & Mertanen O. (2005). New Ways for Teaching Working
Life Related Skills to Engineering Students. International Conference on
Engineering Education. Gliwice, Poland.
19. Kairisto-Mertanen, L., & Mertanen, O. (2006). Designing new curricula according
to the needs expressed by European and local industrial environment. The 9th
International Conference on Engineering Education, San Juan, Puerto Rico, 23.–
8.7.2006.
20. Kairisto-Mertanen, L., Hänti, S., Kallio-Gerlander, J. & Rantanen, H. (2007).
Experiences about entrepreneurship education in gross-disciplinary environment
– Case Turku University of Applied Sciences. The 18th AGM SPACE conference
in Nicosia Cyprus, 20.–23.3.2007.
21. Kafwa, N. O, Obondo, G. Kisaka, T. S. (2015). Teacher Preparation Practices in
Kenya and the 21st Century Learning: A Moral Obligation. In Journal of
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
202
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
Education and Practice 6(17), www.iiste.org ISSN 2222-1735 (Paper) ISSN 2222288X (Online)
22. Kamakar, U. and Apte, U. (2007). Operations management in the information
economy: Information products, processes, and chains. Journal of Operations
Management, Vol. 25, pp. 438–453.
23. Kantola, M. & Kettunen, J. (2012). Integration of education with research and
development and the export of higher education, On the Horizon, 20(1), 7-16.
24. Kaplún, G. (2009). Uruguay: country report. In GIS Watch, Global Information
Society Watch 2009 report (pp. 220–222). Retrieved December 11, 2009 from
http://www.giswatch.org/2009report/pdf/country/uruguay.pdf
25. Kettunen, J., Kairisto-Mertanen, L. & Penttilä, T. (2013). Innovation pedagogy
and desired learning outcomes in higher education, On the Horizon, 21(4), 333342.
26. Kettunen, J. (2012). Innovation pedagogy for universities of applied sciences,
Creative Education, 2(1), 56-62.
27. Kirkland, K. and Sutch, D. (2009), Overcoming the barriers to educational
innovation. A literature review,URL:www.futurelab.org.uk/projects/map-ofinnovations, retrieved 15.4.2011.
28. Kitahara, R., & Hannay, M. (2008). Paradigmatic shifts in the formulation of
public policy towards enhancing the educational system. Paper presented at the
Public Policy: Building Broad-Based Solutions to Complex Problems Conference,
Troy University, November 2-4, 2008, Destin, Florida
29. Knight, P. & Trowler, P.R. (2001).Departmental Leadership in Higher
Education.Buckingham: SRHE and Open University Press.
30. Knowles, M. S., Holton, E. F., & Swanson, R. A. (2011).The adult learner: The
definitive classic in adult education and human resource development, 7th
edition. London: Elsevier.
31. Kocharov,
l.
Skill
http://www.slideshare.net/igorkokcharov/kokcharov-
Skillpyramid 2015
32. Lehto, A., Kairisto-Mertanen, L. – Penttilä, T. (eds) (2011): Towards Innovation
Pedagogy – A New Approach To Teaching And Learning For Universities of
Applied Sciences. Reports from Turku University of Applied Sciences nr 100.
33. Meyer, Addpha, E. (1939). Development of Education in the Twentieth Century.
Prentice Hall
34. McGill, I. and Beaty, L. (1995). Action Learning, Second Edition: A Guide for
Professional, Management and Educational Development. Kogan Page, London.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
203
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
35. Mwaka, M. Nabwire, V.K. Musamas, J. (eds, 2014). Essentials of Instruction: A
handbook for Teachers. Eldoret: Moi University Press. ISBN 9966-854-94-0
36. Nabwire V. K. (2014). Teaching Approaches and Strategies; In Mwaka, M.,
Musamas, J & Nabwire, V.K .(eds). Essentials of Instruction: A handbook for
Teachers. Eldoret: Moi University Press. ISBN 9966-854-94-0
37. Penttilä, T., Putkonen, A. (2013). Knowledge in the Context of Innovation
Pedagogy In Higher Education. Proceedings of INTED2013 conference, Valencia,
Spain.
38. Penttilä,T, Kairisto-Mertanen,L., Putkonen, A. Lehto, A. (2013). Innovation
Pedagogy – A Strategic Learning Approach for the Future. In LehtoAnttoni –
PenttiläTaru (eds.) Pedagogical Views on Innovation Competences And
Entrepreneurship, pp.11-23. Reports from Turku University of Applied Sciences
171. Tampere 2013.
39. Penttilä,T., Kairisto-Mertanen, L.& Putkonen, A. (2011). Communicational
Aspects of Innovation Pedagogy and Stakeholder Dialogue. In Towards
Innovation Pedagogy - A new approach to teaching and learning in universities
of
applied
sciences,
edited
by
LehtoAnttoni,
Kairisto-MertanenLiisa,
PenttiläTaru. Reports from Turku University of Applied Sciences, nr 100, pp. 6575.
40. Penttilä, T. Lyytinen, S., Kairisto-Mertanen, L., Lappalainen, H. (2015). Education
as a Direct Profitable Societal Investment: Innovation Pedagogy Putting
Sociocultural Learning Theories into Practice in Higher Educational Institutes. In
the Advances in Social Science, Education and Humanities Research series, by
3rd UPI International Conference on Technical and Vocational Education and
Training, Indonesia.
http://www.atlantis-press.com/php/pub.php?publication=tvet-14
41. Penttilä, T., Kairisto-Mertanen, L., Putkonen, A. and Lehto, A. (2013): Innovation
pedagogy – a strategic learning approach for the future. pp 11-23. In Lehto,
Anttoni and Penttilä, Taru (ed) (2013): Pedagocical views on innovation
competences and entrepreneurship. Innovation pedagogy and other approaches.
Reports from Turku University of Applied Sciences 171.
42. Piaget, J. (1985). The Equilibration of Cognitive Structures. Chicago, IL:
University of Chicago Press.
43. Republic of Kenya. (2010). Policy Framework for Education and Training:
Reforming Education and Training in Kenya; Nairobi; Press Release
44. Salazar,M.D.C.(2013). A humanizing Pedagogy: Reinventing the Principles and
Practice of Education as a Journey toward Liberation
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
204
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
45. Solon, T. (2007). Generic critical thinking infusion and course content learning in
introductory psychology. Journal of Instructional Psychology, 34(2), 95-109.
46. UNESCO (2015) Addressing the Quality Challenge: Reflections on the post 2015
UNESCO Education Agenda. Netherland commission for UNESCO
47. Vanbuel, M. (1998). Choosing and Using the Appropriate Technology Platform.
Online Educa Conference, Hotel Intercontinental, Berlin, Germany.
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
205
Violet Kafwa Nabwire –
INNOVATIVE PEDAGOGIES IN INSTITUTIONS OF HIGHER LEARNING: BUILDING A BETTER FUTURE?
Annexure: Tables
Table1: Any Time, Any Place Model of Learning: The Martini Model
SYNCHRONOUS
Same Time Same Place
Same Time Different Place
Chalkboard
Educational TV
Overhead projector
Video Conferencing
Slides
Audio Conferencing
Text
Computer Mediated Communication
Video and audio tapes
Satellite Seminars/Keynotes
Resource-based Learning
Internet and WWW
Multimedia CD-ROM
Electronic Mail
Computer Aided Learning
Video Streaming
Texts, Simulations
Video on Demand (VOP)
Video and audio tapes
Virtual Learning Laboratory
Different Time Same Place
Different Time Different Place
ASYNCHRONOUS
Source: Vanbuel, 1998 in Mwaka et al (eds) 2014
European Journal of Education Studies - Volume 1 │ Issue 2 │ 2016
206