Impactful Creative Pedagogy to Enhance Learning about Innovation and Creativity: interview an innovator:
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.56433/vtrtyg59Keywords:
Creativity, Innovation Management, Student Engagement, Learning, AssessmentAbstract
The creative pedagogical practice presented in this paper is an innovate assessment that has been designed to encourage, support and develop transferable skills linked to the 4Cs; critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity in our students (Thornhill-Miller et al. 2023). This paper presents the lecturers’ perspective on delivery and the students’ perceptions of their learning gained. Module evaluations and reflective practice is utilized, underpinned by Rogers (2003) attributes of innovation diffusion as the lens by which the authors evaluate the effectiveness of the adoption of this innovative assessment instrument.
The paper presents the ‘interview an innovator’ assessment underpinned by innovation theories such as the Tidd and Bessant’s (2020) simplified Innovation Process Framework and Goffin and Mitchel’s (2016) Pentathlon Framework. The assessment enables students to relate these theories to practice, i.e. their chosen innovator. It is proposed that the creative design of this assessment could overcome some challenges associated with students utilizing generative AI beyond its use as supportive 'personal companion‘ for their assessments. Conclusions involve reflecting on a Venn diagram of how themodule utilizes creative pedagogy to teach creativity, engaging students in creativity skills to craft their assessment, whilst learning about creativity in action. The continued improvement and lessons learned from delivering this creative assessment is shared and will be useful to other academics to support their academic practice in delivering modules in related topic areas.
References
Atienza, M.C. (2022) Octahedral creativity framework. Creativity. 9(2), 1-28. https://doi.org/10.2478/ctra-2022-0009
Alabbasi, A.M.A., Paek, S.H., Kim, D., & Cramond, B. (2022) What do educators need to know about the Torrance Tests of creative thinking: a comprehensive review. Frontiers in Psychology. 13, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2022.1000385
Almohtadi, R.M & Aldarabah, I.T. (2020). University students’ attitudes toward the formal integration of Facebook in their education: investigation guided by Rogers’ attributes of innovation. World Journal of Education, 20(10), 130-138. https://doi.org/10.5430/wje.v10n4p130
Bass, R. (2012). Disrupting ourselves: The problem of learning in higher education. EDUCAUSE review, 47(2), n2. ISSN-1527-6619
Beames, J. R., Kikas, K., O'Gradey-Lee, M., Gale, N., Werner-Seidler, A., Boydell, K. M., & Hudson, J. L. (2021). A New Normal: Integrating Lived Experience Into Scientific Data Syntheses. Frontiers in psychiatry, 12, 763005.
Benjamin, R. (2012). The seven red herrings about standardized assessments in higher education. Occasional Paper 15. National Institute for Learning Outcomes Assessment, 7–14. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyt.2021.763005
Bouckaert, M. (2023). The assessment of students’ creative and critical thinking skills in higher education across OECD countries: a review of policies and related practice. OECD Education Working Paper No. 293, OECD. https://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/education/the-assessment-of-students-creative-and-critical-thinking-skills-in-higher-education-across-oecd-countries_35dbd439-en
Boyles, M. (2022). The importance of creativity in business. Harvard Business School Online. https://online.hbs.edu/blog/post/importance-of-creativity-in-business
Chen, R. (2024). A study applying Rogers’ innovation diffusion theory on the adoption process of new teaching methods in secondary education. Research and Advances in Education, 3(2), 6-10. https://doi.org/10.56397/RAE.2024.02.02
Cope, J. (2005). Researching entrepreneurship through phenomenological inquiry: philosophical and methodological issues, International Small Business Journal, 23(2), 63-189. https://doi.org/10.1177/0266242605050511
Creative Scotland. (2017). Creative Learning Review. Creative Scotland. https://www.creativescotland.com/binaries/content/assets/creative-scotland/about-us/major-projects/creative-learning-and-young-people/creative-learning-review_final.pdf
Cremin, T. & Chappell, K. (2021). Creative pedagogies: a systematic review. Research Papers in Education, 26(3), 299-331. https://doi.org/10.1080/02671522.2019.1677757
Davidson, S.S., Keebler, J.R., Zhang, T., Chaparro, B., Szalma, J. and Frederick, C.M., 2023. The development and validation of a universal enjoyment measure: The enjoy scale. Current Psychology, 42(21), pp.17733-17745. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12144-022-02967-6
Education Scotland. (2015) How good is our school?. Education Scotland. https://education.gov.scot/media/2swjmnbs/frwk2_hgios4.pdf
Fullana, J., Pallisera, M., Colomer, J., Fernández Peña, R., & Pérez-Burriel, M. (2016). Reflective learning in higher education: A qualitative study on students’ perceptions. Studies in Higher Education, 41(6), 1008-1022. https://doi.org/10.1080/03075079.2014.950563
Gilson, L.L., & Litchfield, R.C. (2017). Idea collections: a link between creativity and innovation. Innovation: Organization and Management, 19(1), 80-85. https://doi.org/10.1080/14479338.2016.1270765
Elumalai, K. V., Sankar, J. P., Kalaichelvi, R., John, J. A., Menon, N., Alqahtani, M. S. M., & Abumelha, M. A. (2021). Factors affecting the quality of e-learning during the COVID-19 pandemic from the perspective of higher education students. Chapter 8 in COVID-19 and Education: Learning and Teaching in a Pandemic-Constrained Environment, pp.167-190.Informing Science Press. https://doi.org/10.28945/4628
Gilson, L. L., & Litchfield, R. C. (2017). Idea collections: A link between creativity and innovation. Innovation, 19(1), 80-85. https://doi.org/10.28945/4628
Glasgow Caledonian University (GCU). (2024). Strategy for Learning 2030. GCU. [date accessed 03.10.2024] https://www.gcu.ac.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/126117/Strategy-for-Learning-2030.pdf
Goffin, K., & Mitchell, R. (2016). Innovation management: effective strategy and implementation. Bloomsbury Publishing.
Green, A. E., Beaty, R. E., Kenett, Y. N., & Kaufman, J. C. (2024). The process definition of creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 36(3), 544-572. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2023.2254573
Jahnke, I., Haertel, T., & Wildt, J. (2017). Teachers’ conceptions of student creativity in higher creativity. Innovations in Education and Teaching International, 54 (1), 87-95. https://doi.org/10.1080/14703297.2015.1088396
Kahn, K. B. (2018). Understanding innovation. Business Horizons, 61(3), 453-460. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2018.01.011
Mendoza-Silva, A. (2021). Innovation capability: a systematic literature review. European Journal of Innovation Management, 24(3), 707-734. https://doi.org/10.1108/EJIM-09-2019-0263
Plakhotnik, M.S. (2017). Using the informational interview to get an insight into the profession of a manager. The International Journal of Management Education. 15, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijme.2017.02.002
Rogers, E.M. (2003). Diffusion of Innovations. 5th Edition. Free Press.
Schon, D. (1983) The Reflective Practitioner: how professionals think in action. Basic Books.
Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework (SCQF). (2024). Interactive Framework. Scottish Credit and Qualifications Framework. https://scqf.org.uk/the-framework/interactive-framework/
Skills Development Scotland. (2018). Skills 4.0: a skills model to drive Scotland’s future. Skills Development Scotland. https://www.skillsdevelopmentscotland.co.uk/media/pgkgrzlf/skills-4-0_a-model-to-drive-scotlands-future.pdf
Speight, L., Crawford, K., & Haddelsey, S. (2018). Towards measures of longitudinal learning gain in UK higher education: the challenge of meaningful engagement. Higher Education Pedagogies, 3(1), 196–218. https://doi-org.gcu.idm.oclc.org/10.1080/23752696.2018.1476827
Stroebe, W. (2016). Why good teaching evaluations may reward bad teaching: On grade inflation and other unintended consequences of student evaluations. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 11(6), 800-816. https://doi.org/10.1177/1745691616650284
Thornhill-Miller, B., Camarda, A., Mercier, M., Burkhardt, J.M., Morisseau, T., Bourgeois-Bougrine, S., Vinchon, F., El Hayek, S., Augereau-Landais, M., Mourey, F., Feybesse, C., Sundquist, D., & Lubart, T. (2023). Creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration: assessment, certification, and promotion of 21st century skills for the future of work and education. Journal of Intelligence, 11(3), 54. https://doi.org/10.3390/jintelligence11030054
Tidd, J., & Bessant, J.R. (2020). Managing Innovation: integrating technological, market and organizational change. 7th Edition, John Wiley & Sons.
Veine, S., Anderson, M. K., Andersen, N. H., Espenes, T. C., Søyland, T. B., Wallin, P., & Reams, J. (2019). Reflection as a core student learning activity in higher education - Insights from nearly two decades of academic development. International Journal for Academic Development, 25(2), 147–161. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2019.1659797
Wentzel, K. (2020). Motivating students to learn. Routledge.
Wiley, C. (2019). Standardised module evaluation surveys in UK higher education: establishing students’ perspectives. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 61, 55-65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2019.02.004
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Dr Julie Roberts, Dr Peter Duncan, Dr Melissa Mesek
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
Journal of Perspectives in Applied Academic Practice has made best effort to ensure accuracy of the contents of this journal, however makes no claims to the authenticity and completeness of the articles published. Authors are responsible for ensuring copyright clearance for any images, tables etc which are supplied from an outside source.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
