Direkt zum Inhalt
WI2020 Community Tracks
Designing a Sandpit- and Co-Design-informed Innovation Process for Scaling TEL Research in Higher Education

Sebastian Dennerlein, Viktoria Pammer-Schindler, Markus Ebner, Günter Getzinger & Martin Ebner Graz University of Technology, Institute of Interactive Systems and Data Science, Graz University of Technology, Educational Technology, Austria,
Graz University of Technology, Science and Technology Studies, Austria

Sustainably digitalizing higher education requires a human-centred approach. To address actual problems in teaching as well as learning and increase acceptance, the Technology Enhanced Learning (TEL) solution(s) must be co-designed with affected researchers, teachers, students and administrative staff. We present research-in-progress about a sandpit-informed innovation process with a f2f-marketplace of TEL research and problemmapping as well team formation alongside a competitive call phase, which is followed by a cooperative phase of funded interdisciplinary pilot teams codesigning and implementing TEL innovations. Pilot teams are supported by a University Innovation Canvas to document and reflect on their TEL innovation from multiple viewpoints.

Schlüsselwörter: higher education, sandpit, co-design, innovation, TEL

1. Stagars, M.: University Startups and Spin-Offs. Apress, Berkeley, CA (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4842-0623-2.
2. DBRC, (Design-Based Research Collective): Design-based research: An emerging paradigm for educational inquiry. Educ. Res. 32, 5–8 (2003). https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X032001005.
3. Maxwell, K., Benneworth, P.: The construction of new scientific norms for solving Grand Challenges. Palgrave Commun. 4, (2018). https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-018-0105-9.
4. Ebner, M., Hell, T., Ebner, M.: How to Foster Technology-Enhanced Learning in Higher Education. In: Elçi, A., Beith, L., and Elçi, A. (eds.) Handbook of Research on Faculty Development for Digital Teaching and Learning. pp. 402–416. Hershey, PA: IGI Global (2019). https://doi.org/10.4018/978-1-5225-8476-6.ch020.
5. Cooper, R.G., Edgett, S.J.: Portfolio Management for New Products: Picking The Winners. Prod. Innov. Best Pract. Ser. 1–16 (2008).
6. Brunckhorst, J.: Behind the Dartboard - Explore the Dartboard Dimensions, and Discover Tools to Strengthen Your Team across Each Dimension, https://productdartboard.com/behind-the-dartboard, last accessed 2020/01/10.
7. Brunckhorst, J.: The Product Dartboard - Product Management, https://blog.carbonfive.com/2015/07/29/the-product-dartboard/, last accessed 2020/01/10.
8. Osterwalder, A., Pigneur, Y.: Business Model Ceneration. (2010). https://doi.org/10.1523/JNEUROSCI.0307-10.2010.
9. Maurya, A.: Running lean: Iterate from Plan A to a Plan That Works (Lean Series). (2012).
10. Krogstie, B.R.: A Model of Retrospective Reflection in Project Based Learning Utilizing Historical Data in Collaborative Tools. Learning. 418–432 (2009).
11. Zott, C., Amit, R.: Business model design: An activity system perspective. Long Range Plann. 43, 216–226 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lrp.2009.07.004.
12. Engeström, Y.: Expansive Learning at Work: toward an activity theoretical reconceptualization. J. Educ. Work. 14, 133–156 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1080/13639080123238.
13. Barab, S.A., Evans, M.A., Baek, E.-O.: Activity Theory As a Lens for Characterizing the Participatory Unit. In: Handbook of Research on Educational Communications and Technology (2nd ed.). (2004).
14. Dennerlein, S., Gutounig, R., Kraker, P., Kaiser, R., Ausserhofer, J.: Assessing Barcamps : Incentives for Participation in Ad-Hoc Conferences and the Role of Social Media. In: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on Knowledge Management and Knowledge Technologies (2013).
15. Cukurova, M., Luckin, R., Clark-Wilson, A.: Creating the golden triangle of evidence-informed education technology with EDUCATE. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 50, 490–504 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12727.