Introducing and managing innovation in an educational structure

إدماج الابتكار وإدارته في هيكل تعليمي

Introduire et gérer l'innovation dans une structure éducative

Benaissa Meriem Rym

Benaissa Meriem Rym, « Introducing and managing innovation in an educational structure », Aleph [], 9 (3) | 2022, 19 June 2022, 16 July 2024. URL :

Educational innovations include pedagogical innovation, scientific and methodological innovation, educational and technological innovation. ... Higher education institutions that have chosen an innovation-based development, become competitive leaders on the education market
The article describes the different approaches to the interpretation of educational innovations and innovations in education. The modern labor market requires graduate’s ability to operate such technologies and knowledge that meet the needs of the information society, prepare young people for new roles in this society. It is necessary to distinguish between the concepts “educational innovations” and “innovations in education”. Innovation in education is a broader concept than educational innovation. They include educational, scientific and technological, infrastructural, economic, social, legal, administrative and other innovations. Educational innovations are understood as a procedure or method of educational activity that differs significantly from established practice and is used to increase the level of efficiency in a competitive environment. Educational innovations include pedagogical innovation, scientific and methodological innovation, educational and technological innovation. It is substantiated that the education market is one of the most important elements of the national innovation system. Higher education institutions that have chosen an innovation-based development, become competitive leaders on the education market. The formation of new forms of education and the use of perfect controlling mechanisms at each educational institution will give the opportunity to create single educational space, which is able to meet the needs of society in quality education with specific opportunities of customers in the educational market. The main components of the innovation development of higher education institutions are determined.

تعد إدارة الابتكار التربوي في مؤسسات التعليم العالي عملية معقدة تتطلب استراتيجيات محددة تعتمد على البحث والأطر المثبتة. إن الهدف من هذا المقال هو دراسة كيفية استخدام الإطار النظري لتحليل عمليات التغيير التنظيمي وتقييم التقدم والنتائج الخاصة بمبادرة الابتكار التربوي على المستوى الجامعي. تضمن هذا الابتكار التعليمي استخدام ممارسات المناهج الحديثة لتعزيز الاستراتيجيات التربوية ونتائج تعلم الطلاب.

تشمل الابتكارات التعليمية الابتكارات التربوية والابتكار العلمي والمنهجي والابتكار التعليمي والتكنولوجي. إن مؤسسات التعليم العالي التي اختارت تطويرًا قائمًا عل الابتكار، تصبح رائدة تنافسية في سوق التعليم

يصف المقال المناهج المختلفة لتفسير الابتكارات والابتكارات التربوية في التعليم. يتطلب سوق العمل الحديث قدرة الخريجين على تشغيل مثل هذه التقنيات والمعرفة التي تلبي احتياجات مجتمع المعلومات، وإعداد الشباب لأدوار جديدة في هذا المجتمع. من الضروري التمييز بين مفهومي “الابتكارات التربوية” و “الابتكارات في التعليم”. الابتكار في التعليم مفهوم أوسع من الابتكار التربوي. وهي تشمل الابتكارات التعليمية والعلمية والتكنولوجية والبنية التحتية والاقتصادية والاجتماعية والقانونية والإدارية وغيرها. تُفهم الابتكارات التعليمية على أنها إجراء أو طريقة للنشاط التعليمي تختلف اختلافًا كبيرًا عن الممارسة المعمول بها وتستخدم لزيادة مستوى الكفاءة في بيئة تنافسية. تشمل الابتكارات التعليمية الابتكارات التربوية والابتكار العلمي والمنهجي والابتكار التعليمي والتكنولوجي. من المؤكد أن سوق التعليم هو أحد أهم عناصر نظام الابتكار الوطني. إن مؤسسات التعليم العالي التي اختارت تطويرًا قائمًا على الابتكار، تصبح رائدة تنافسية في سوق التعليم.و هذا ما سيتيح تشكيل أشكال جديدة من التعليم واستخدام آليات تحكم مثالية في كل مؤسسة تعليمية الفرصة لإنشاء مساحة تعليمية واحدة قادرة على تلبية احتياجات المجتمع في التعليم الجيد مع فرص محددة للعملاء في السوق التعليمي و تحديد المكونات الرئيسية لتطوير الابتكار في مؤسسات التعليم العالي.

Les innovations éducatives comprennent l'innovation pédagogique, l'innovation scientifique et méthodologique, l'innovation éducative et technologique. ... Les établissements d'enseignement supérieur qui ont choisi un développement basé sur l'innovation deviennent des leaders compétitifs sur le marché de l'éducation.
L'article décrit les différentes approches de l'interprétation des innovations pédagogiques et des innovations dans l'éducation. Le marché du travail moderne exige que les diplômés soient capables d'utiliser les technologies et les connaissances qui répondent aux besoins de la société de l'information et préparent les jeunes à jouer de nouveaux rôles dans cette société. Il est nécessaire de faire la distinction entre les concepts d'“innovations éducatives” et d'“innovations dans l'éducation”. L'innovation en éducation est un concept plus large que l'innovation pédagogique. Elles comprennent les innovations éducatives, scientifiques et technologiques, infrastructurelles, économiques, sociales, juridiques, administratives et autres. Les innovations éducatives sont comprises comme une procédure ou une méthode d'activité éducative qui diffère significativement de la pratique établie et qui est utilisée pour augmenter le niveau d'efficacité dans un environnement compétitif. Les innovations éducatives comprennent l'innovation pédagogique, l'innovation scientifique et méthodologique, l'innovation éducative et technologique. Il est prouvé que le marché de l'éducation est l'un des éléments les plus importants du système national d'innovation. Les établissements d'enseignement supérieur qui ont choisi un développement fondé sur l'innovation deviennent des leaders compétitifs sur le marché de l'éducation. La formation de nouvelles formes d'éducation et l'utilisation de mécanismes de contrôle parfaits dans chaque établissement d'enseignement donneront l'occasion de créer un espace éducatif unique, capable de répondre aux besoins de la société en matière d'éducation de qualité avec des opportunités spécifiques de clients sur le marché de l'éducation. Les principales composantes du développement de l'innovation des établissements d'enseignement supérieur sont déterminées.


Many mistakenly believe innovation has to do with the use of technology or new inventions. In "Four Dimensions of Innovation in Education, “ Lars Esdal, executive director of Education Evolving, describes innovation in education as doing things in a new way. To do something differently requires coming up with an approach, process, product or strategy.

Esdal explains that outdated thinking of how to design a school leads to subpar performance in public education. ” Learning experiences could be redesigned to be far more relevant to student interests and career paths, personalized to their aptitudes and abilities, and responsive to their culture and identities, “ he writes.

Innovation in education encourages teachers and students to explore, research and use all the tools to uncover something new. It involves a different way of looking at problems and solving them. The thinking process that goes into it will help students develop their creativity and their problem solving skills.

Innovation does not mean creating something from nothing. Just like with any good science project, it relies on researching existing solutions to come up with a new hypothesis to test.

”Original research is critical to our education system's overall success, “ writes Vadim Polikov in ”Innovation in Education Is More than a New Approach.“ ”I firmly believe that proving -- or disproving -- hypotheses with strong rigorous research is the best way to move education forward. “

Innovation improves education because it compels students to use a higher level of thinking to solve problems.

Innovation includes finding better ways of doing something and new ways to look at problems. ESchool News shares the story of students building recycling bins to support sustainability. The students did not simply build bins.

They identified problems with the waste management program, researched solutions and created an advertising

plan to promote their solution with help from other areas of the school, such as robotics and broadcasting. The application of project-based learning is another approach for spurring innovation and creative thinking. Instead of working on a single project in a math class, project-based learning combines multiple disciplines in one project. It promotes active and deeper learning.

One teacher incorporated Lois Lowry's The Giver into a unit, complete with a test, writing assignments about the book, and a project. Amber Chandler describes the project in ”Build Your Own Utopia : The Giver PBL Unit.“ In the project, students create their own utopian community and try to sway other students to move there.

This project involves designing the community, creating a government and educational system, describing their neighborhoods, outlining employment, deciding on the climate for the community, and identifying technology views.

It combines all the disciplines : writing, math, social studies, science and art. In doing this, students think through everything it takes to build a city or country. They learn about their current government and communities by contrasting them with the ideal society they create.

School leaders want to avoid mandating innovation. ” Policy should create opportunities and incentives for folks to design different and better learning experiences, but not require it, “ Lars Esdal writes.

Instead of simply teaching ABCs and 123s, innovation goes beyond the basics by combining a variety of disciplines to come up with a new or different outcome. Knowledge of the basics is a starting point. Students use knowledge and concepts to find solutions by exploring until they find the best answers.

How can school leaders learn how to incorporate innovation and technology without mandating it ? Some universities offer courses on innovation in their online MS Ed. in Educational Leadership programs as part of the core curriculum. Just as project-based learning focuses on the whole child by combining disciplines, ” Innovative School Leadership “ teaches students how to implement systems that lead to innovation.

This quote from poet William Butler Yeats is a fitting parallel for the role of innovation in education : ” Education should not be the filling of a pail, but the lighting of a fire.

The objective of this article is to get students to :

    • acquire the theoretical and methodological basis for analyzing technological innovation processes in an institution to propose, implement and pilot technology-based educational projects.

    • reinvest these bases and concepts in a project analysis of the institutions in which they fit ;

    • reflect both on the institution in which he/she intends to implement its individual project and on the relevance of this project in relation to the visions and strategies, structure, needs, actors, practices, resources of the institution.

The specific purpose here is to produce an analysis grid based on important concepts from a series of resources.

1. Methodology

The working methodology combined :

    • Reading articles

    • Designing a clean methodological grid

    • the collection of criteria for assessing the innovative nature and indicators of innovation of each of the resources we have exploited.

2. Results and discussion :

For an individual, a nation, and humankind to survive and progress, innovation and evolution are essential. Innovations in education are of particular importance because education plays a crucial role in creating a sustainable future. “Innovation resembles mutation, the biological process that keeps species evolving so they can better compete for survival” (Hoffman and Holzhuter, 2012, p. 3). Innovation, therefore, is to be regarded as an instrument of necessary and positive change. Any human activity (e.g. industrial, business, or educational) needs constant innovation to remain sustainable. The need for educational innovations has become acute. “It is widely believed that countries’ social and economic well-being will depend to an ever greater extent on the quality of their citizens’ education : the emergence of the so-called ‘knowledge society’, the transformation of information and the media, and increasing specialization on the part of organizations all call for high skill profiles and levels of knowledge. Today’s education systems are required to be both effective and efficient, or in other words, to reach the goals set for them while making the best use of available resources” (Cornali, 2012, p. 255). According to an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) report, “the pressure to increase equity and improve educational outcomes for students is growing around the world” (Vieluf et al., 2012, p. 3). In the USA, underlying pressure to innovate comes from political, economic, demographic, and technological forces from both inside and outside the nation.

We have therefore identified six main actors of innovation, as well as a collection of criteria for assessing the innovative nature and indicators of innovation of each of the resources we have exploited.

2.1. Innovation players

2.1.1. The Chief Establishment :

The first actor of innovation is undoubtedly the chief establishment, he/ she is the one who must have a culture of innovation, therefore, the innovation indicators for this actor are :

  • Dissatisfied, anticipating, willing, active, and proactive.

  • To be driven by a creative utopia.

  • Have a stated and declared vision (project-targeted).

  • Create a strategic plot game that considers the different players.

  • Know how to manage the insecurity and uncertainties that result from the implementation of the project-target ».

  • Aware and accept that some projects are ending, and others are being created.

  • Have a systemic view of the environment and work levels.

  • Have theoretical references.

  • Knowing how to associate and integrate theories into practice.

  • Have a taste for action.

  • Have a taste for power over action.

  • Enjoying printing your brand in action.

  • Loving to get involved ; Being able to step back from the action. Knowing how to lead a project.

2.1.2. Project management : what kind of approach ?

When managing a project, we must meet the following criteria :

  • Know how to stimulate, encourage, value.

  • Set up autonomous teams.

  • Use relay people.

  • Plan for phases of consultation.

  • Creating the institutional conditions for change.

  • Promote a culture of innovation.

  • Supporting active employees.

  • Interpreting rules and skillfully using external injunctions as means of internal pressure, including reforms.

  • Interface between external and internal needs.

Indeed, a project responsible is in fact the key success of any innovation project. He/se is not only an institutional responsible, but a human resource manager. He/she is the one who can set all necessary conditions for innovation to take part.

In a culture of innovation, the goal of the pilot is to learn, so the school system can improve. ... In a culture of innovation, learning is used to challenge existing decisions about how the organization is run, to persistently push the organization to find better and better ways meeting the needs of students (Amabile, TM (1997) Motivating creativity in organizations : on doing what you love and loving what you do. California Management Review 40 (1) : 39 – 58.)

2.2. Driving Innovation

Any educational institution must provide Ministries of Education with a multi-stakeholder platform for schools, head teachers, teachers, teacher trainers, researchers, and industry, using exchange mechanisms, study visits, working groups, projects, and cross-country policy experimentations to support the transformation of education in Europe. The network is moving into an exciting new era. With the ongoing support of all its members, Ministries are faced at national level with key challenges and issues, and the added value of the network is to continue to support all ministries in exchanging policy approaches, teacher capacity-building, whole school approaches to implementing innovative practices, and working with others to bring about systemic change in education system. To bring about this transformation over the next decade, the central focus will be on a wider range of school education issues. More particularly, we have identified several key areas for action which will guide future activities. Life and work skills for today and tomorrow.

2.2.1. Digital citizenship :

In an increasingly digital society, schools have an obligation to prepare young people to be responsible and critical citizens in an online world. Every student and teacher must acquire digital competences - and digital citizenship competences - so they can thrive in our digital society and be prepared to respond positively to new opportunities and challenges. Skills and employment : education and employment must be seen as inter-related issues in any healthy and thriving 18 New teaching practices economy.

2.2.2. Innovative teacher education :

The quality of teaching and learning depends on high-quality initial and continuing professional development of teachers alongside committed school leadership. Capacity-building of teachers (including future teachers) and encouraging innovative pedagogy will remain a key mission.

2.2.3. Assessment :

The evolution of teaching and learning can only be accompanied by matching innovation and change in the way learning is assessed and examined. It is an area where new approaches adapted to new learning modes and models could usefully be developed and piloted. Schools as evolving organizations Whole school change : developing innovative schools and supporting whole school change management will require the ongoing development of practical tools such as the Future Classroom Toolkit, but this will also require new projects and initiatives that engage school leaders and help promote shared leadership approaches at school level. The development of new flexible learning spaces in schools will increasingly be key to facilitating widespread adoption of innovative teaching and learning approaches.

2.2.4. School networking :

Exchanges between schools will remain one of the most efficient and cost-effective ways of improving teaching and learning at classroom level. Communities of practice and peer learning, especially when self-regulated, is a highly effective means of spreading inspiring innovative practices, and the number of schools engaged in collaborative projects is testimony to this approach.

2.2.5. Formal, non-formal and informal learning :

Our education systems will need to progressively redefine the boundaries between formal, non-formal and informal learning that takes place in and out of school. Technology will continue to transform how, where and when people learn. Education technology : it is of key importance to continue to leverage digital technologies to support learners and teachers, to underpin institutional change, and to enable and mainstream innovation. Appropriately used, educational technologies will continue to play a critical role in implementing future learning scenarios. Pilot and demonstration projects : the network will continue to provide policy makers with important evidence on which to base policy decisions. Qualitative and exploratory investigation/ research is still needed to better understand how some innovative practice can be supported by technology before considering randomized control trials (RCT) approaches. In addition, cooperation with all institutional stakeholders (especially regions and cities) is essential for contributing to large scale adoption of successful innovation developed in pilot and experimental project.

2.3. Innovative products

Technically speaking, it is about the articulation of presence and distance means of teaching, integrating remote activities into a teaching that is traditionally carried out in the presence. It is also about to allow resource exchange, and the construction of innovative projects while reducing infrastructure costs.

Speaking about educational contribution, let’s then open to other students, other teachers, and a variety of accessible resources outside of University Space-time flexibilization : when you want, where you are (from the moment you access the network hosting the resources) to encourage the participation of all players in the exchange.

Reviewing teachers training is also a very important part of the challenge. Recognize an academic value to ssocial skills to communicate and collaborate technical skills such as becoming an ICT user for one's own projects ; knowledge built in interaction and related to a practice

metacognitive skills such as describing, analyzing, theorizing one's own learning experience.

2.4. The dynamic of innovation

Trends in today’s globalised knowledge society are greatly influencing the conditions of professional practice, learning and knowledge. A large amount of knowledge relevant for teachers’ practice is generated and circulated within scientific and professional communities, as well as across institutional boundaries, resulting in a wide range of resources that partly represent conflicting evidence (Fenwick, Nerland, & Jensen, 2012). New responsibilities for practitioners include navigating these abundant resources, engaging with them, and interpreting, evaluating and applying them. In this context, teachers are also increasingly required to collaborate with others and contribute to knowledge production. Clearly, teachers’ knowledge is in a constant state of transformation in this setting. Fenwick, Nerland and Jensen (2012) point to the relatively scarce evidence on the epis - temic dimension of professions, in particular the dynamics of knowledge and professional expertise. Knowledge is inherently dynamic (McInerney, 2002) ; it transforms as it integrates new information or evidence, is shaped through learning and experience, and is also constructed in professional practice. Understanding the complex mechanisms of these dynamics can inform the design of teacher learning, whether it is embedded in formal or non-formal teacher education (e.g. initial preparation, professional development courses, workshops), or informal settings such as work-based learning and engaging in communities of practice. Teachers do not simply acquire and develop their individual knowledge ; they also produce collective knowledge that is shared in turn. These processes influence the knowledge base of the profession. Teachers’ knowledge base is also affected by policy design and interventions, the success of which depends to some extent precisely on this dynamic. Innovation and change are becoming integral to the teaching profession as a response to the complex challenges that societal changes imply (Schleicher, 2016). Innovation in education, seen as a “function of the learningand knowledge creation” rather than the result of research and development (Ellström, 2010, p. 27), is intimately linked to the transformation of professional knowledge. Definitions of innovation that encompass, in addition to products and processes, new ideas, beliefs, explicit and tacit knowledge are particularly helpful in education (Halász & Fazekas, 2016 ; Larson & Dearing, 2008). Knowledge in this sense is at the same time a driver, a main pillar and an outcome of innovation. Knowledge has been identified as a crucial factor that drives innovation because it underlies several of the incentives or “pumps” of innovation (OECD, 2004 ; Halász & Fazekas, 2016). It is also an outcome of innovation when new knowledge is created as a result of the innovation process. This is reflected in conceptualisations that distinguish “knowledge innovation” as a particular type (OECD/Eurostat, 2005). In fact, knowledge and method innovation was found to be present in the education sector more so than in other sectors (OECD, 2014). Creating, sharing and using knowledge are also seen as inherent and crucial mechanisms of the innovation process, for example in the Innova research project presented in this special issue. This multifaceted role is captured by the concept of knowledge dynamics.

2.5. Driving innovation

When driving innovation, the following innovation indicators are important, namely :

In terms of structure :

  • A structured organization of material and technological means.

  • To understand the levels of analysis and insertion of the project : micro, meso or macro ;

  • Choose reference points based on the questions asked and the situation analyzed.

At the actor level.

  • Changing representations and practices.

  • Changing culture because of continuing education.

  • An actor may be assigned several roles and functions.

  • Emergence of actors acting as animators.

  • Emergence of actors acting as tutors.

At the level of individuals.

  • Taking into account individual variables in the innovative project, a sign of the individual's appreciation : his personal characteristics, his representations and visions, his skills, his resources, his attitudes, his desires, his expectations, his motivations, his needs, his fears, his practices, his professional experience. In terms of domains :

  • Considering the areas in which each of the actors will be able to fully embody each of its individual variables. These areas are pedagogy, disciplines, technology, media coverage and mediation, organization, economics and politics

2.6. Concepts related to innovation

The IRPV methodological tool De Ketele, J.-M. (2002), The IRPV methodological tool should allow us to analyze the context of the emergence of the unpublished (seen as something “that seemed unthinkable before in the eyes of the actors involved but which now appears as possible and as the object of a new commitment ») The tool allows four fundamental questions to analyze the actions to be implemented.

I as ideally desirable : Do you personally think that, in absolute terms, this action is ideally desirable ? »
A as already completed or in the process of being completed : “Personally, do you ever implement this action ? »
P as possible : ” From your personal point of view, do you think that implementing this action is possible ? »
C as a commitment : “If you were asked, would you want to implement this action ? » (pp. 39-40).

According to the author, experience shows among the actions that bring innovation or newness only those that are described by the structures -- (IRPV) and ”IPV “ (IPV) are achievable in a given context, on the other hand, the perception of certain actions may change.

  1. The Rogers model or « Analysis of the process of integration and adoption of innovation by users (Rogers E.M., 1988/3), or the speed at which integrating and adopting innovation happen. The adoption of an innovation, in his view, requires a stratification of the population into different groups quickly get involved in the process :

  • Initially, there were few innovators (2.5 %).

  • then come early adapters (13.5 %).

  • then an early majority (34 %).

  • second, a late majority (34 %).

  • and finally late comers (16 %)

  1. Chin's model (Chin, R., 1976) : Change is defined as “the process by which a profound and lasting change, alteration occurs in a specific system”. Five (5) levels of change are identified, ranging from the simplest to the most complex :

  • substitution change.

  • change by alteration.

  • change by disturbance and variation.

  • change through restructuring.

  • changes in values.

The change relates to what Chin calls units of change “ that can affect professors, students and the institution (curricular modification). substitution change (the product or means used is substituted by another) and alteration change (an element of the task is modified or substituted) appear as unavoidable changes in educational innovation where Information and Communication Technology (ICT) are proposed.


This work of reading and developing an analysis grid around the concepts of innovation is particularly instructive. It allows us to discover theoretical concepts.

From the point of view of the pedagogical approach, the constant back-and-forth between the grid and the resources will help to understand the multiple theoretical concepts and to identify the similarities and parentages that exist between them.

By putting the work done in relation to personal projects, it should provide a clearer picture of what a project could bring in terms of innovation and to anticipate the difficulties that might emerge when it is implemented. Knowing them, even partially, students should already be able to develop the strategies of approaches best suited to our context and our actors.

Belisle C., Bianchi J. and Jourdan R. (1999), Media Practices. 50 keywords, Paris, CNRS Editions.

Bonami, M. and Guarantor, M. (1996). School systems and innovation management. Emergence and implementation of change. Brussels : De Boeck.

Charlier, B., Bonamy, J, Saunders, M. (2002). Taming innovation. In Technology and innovation in pedagogy. Innovative training devices for higher education. Brussels : De Boeck.

Chin, R. (1976). The utility of system models and developmental models for practitioners. In W.¶G. Bennis, K.D. Benne, R. Chin & K.E. Corey (Eds.). The planning of change (3rd Ed.) New York : Holt Rinehart & Winston. 90-102.

De Ketele, J.-M. (2002). Evaluation of and in innovation. Collective, evaluate innovative practices (p. 35-42). Paris : CNDP.

Deaudelin C., Dussault M., Brodeur M. (2002). The impact of a strategy for integrating ICT in primary schools among teachers. In Come J., Peraya D., Karesenti T. (Ed.). ICT Pedagogical Integration : Research and Training [Special Issue]. Science Review


Fullan, M.G. (1991). The meaning of educational change, 2nd Ed. New York, NY : Teachers College Press.

Guarantor, M. (1999). Piloting and supporting innovation in schools. In Innovation, a lever for change in educational institutions. Paris : MEN.

Gelinas A. and Fortin, R. (1996). Teacher development management : enseignants : training-research with school principals in Quebec. In M. Bonami, and M. Garant (1996). School systems and innovation management. Emergence and implementation of change (115-145). Brussels : De Boeck.

Hall, G. E. et Hord, S. M. (1987). Change in schools : Facilitating the process. Albany, NY : State University of New York.

Moles A. (1988), Structural Theory of Communication and Society, Paris, CNET/ENST, Masson.

Pelletier, G. Piloting an innovation or... the art of dealing with the useless [on line]. Conference presented at the 2nd Green Knowledge Days of the Directorate General of Education and Research of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries held at La Saline Royale d'Arc and Senans on 26-29 September1994.

Peraya D. (1995). New technologies or emerging technologies : towards an educational reappropriation of new technologies ? In Johnson D. (Eds), La formazione a distanza. Distance training (17-43). Bern : Peter Lang.

Peraya D. (2000), ” Cyberspace, a mediated communication and training device." In Alava S. (Ed.), Cyberspace and open training. Towards a change in training practices (pp. 17-44), Brussels : De Boeck.

Peraya, D. and Jaccaz, B. (2003). Summary sheets. A framework on innovation, European Project Equel.

Peraya, D. and Jaccaz, B. (2004). Analyzing, Supporting, and Driving Innovation : an ASPI model. In Proceedings of the 2004 TICE Symposium, Information and Knowledge Technologies in Higher Education and Industry (pp. 283-289). University of Technology. Compiègne (October 19-21).

Perriault J. (1996), The Communication of Remote Knowledge, Paris, Harmattan.

Punie Y., Veller A., Verhoest P. and Burgelman J.-C. (1994). The dissemination of telematics innovations from the point of view of users : the cases of small professional users. Information Technology and Society, 6, 3, 220-248.

Rogers E.M. (1988/3). Diffusion of innovations. New York, Free Press

Savoy-Zajc, L. (1993). Models of planned change in education. Montreal : Logic Editions.

Viens, J. (2003), Towards a general framework to assess and support innovative pedagogy in elearning. 5 th International Conference on New Educational Environments (ICNEE), 26-28 May 2003, Lucerne (Switzerland).

Benaissa Meriem Rym

Université Abou Bekr Belkaid-Tlemcen

© Tous droits réservés à l'auteur de l'article