Capturing the innovators, innovations and inventiveness of South Australian secondary education

Innovation manifests in many different ways throughout education but is often referenced non-specifically as a broad catch-all for novel improvement. Dissecting this terminology reveals more nuance. For instance, constantly evolving knowledge, societies and economies drive a need for simultaneous change in education (Austin & Starkey, 2016). Implementing intentional changes in response to these drivers is commonly conceptualised as innovation (Akın, 2016). However, it is also commonly used to refer to student capability; students develop a personal innovative capacity during their education. By examining various phenomena ascribed as innovative from different stakeholder perspectives, this research picks apart and highlights the distinct elements of educational innovation. This was achieved via examination of definitions of innovation, sourced from a systematic literature review (SLR), to form an ontological understand of the concept’s use between 2016-2024. Pragmatic insights are derived from interviews with school leadership and teachers, lesson observations and surveys of recent secondary school graduates. Artefacts from these sources are analysed using our conceptual framework: Educational Innovation Processes and Stakeholders (EIPS). EIPS combines and extends two existing frameworks, the 4I’s Organisational Learning Framework and the OECD 2030 Learning Framework  (Crossan et al., 1999; OECD, 2018), such that innovations can be examined as internal or external processes relating to different educational stakeholders at their associated organisational level. This analysis provides detailed breakdowns relating internal elements—pedagogy, personalised learning and data literacy—and external elements—architecture, technology, curriculum, funding and policy—with stakeholder groups—government, industry, schools, teachers and students. Several case studies examining innovative approaches in South Australian schools, illustrating their integration into practice. By combining these studies with further application of EIPS to a broader range of educational innovations and contexts we aim to empower educational leaders to identify opportunities to innovate, structure appropriate supports and integrate innovations into practice so they can rapidly respond to changing student needs. 

Akın, U. (2016). Innovation Efforts in Education and School Administration: Views of Turkish School Administrators. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 16(63), 243–260. https://doi.org/10.14689/ejer.2016.63.14
Austin, L., & Starkey, L. (2016). Decision making in Senior Secondary School Curriculum Innovation. Journal of Educational Leadership, Policy and Practice, 31(1/2), 92–107.
Crossan, M. M., Lane, H. W., & White, R. E. (1999). An Organizational Learning Framework: From Intuition to Institution. The Academy of Management Review, 24(3), 522–537. https://doi.org/10.2307/259140
OECD. (2018). Learning Framework 2030. https://www.oecd.org/education/2030/learning-framework-2030.htm/