kvmolurОбразование и саморазвитиеEducation and Self-Development1991-7740Казанский (Приволжский) федеральный университет10.26907/esd.18.2.08XOWGFWkvmolur-91Research ArticleСтатьиШоковая инновация: концептуализация процесса цифровой трансформации образования в период пандемииShock Innovation: Conceptualisation of Digital Transformation in Education during the Covid-19 Pandemichttps://orcid.org/0000-0001-5296-8708КоролеваД. О.KorolevaD.

Диана О. Королева

Москва

 Diana Koroleva

Moscow

dkoroleva@hse.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-1537-0517АндрееваА. А.AndreevaA.

Анастасия А. Андреева

Москва

Anastasia Andreeva

Moscow

aaandreeva@hse.ruhttps://orcid.org/0000-0003-3794-0234ХавенсонТ. Е.KhavensonT.

Татьяна Е. Хавенсон

Москва

Tatiana Khavenson

Moscow

tkhavenson@hse.ruНациональный исследовательский университет Высшая школа экономикиРоссияNational Research University Higher School of EconomicsRussian Federation202329092025182100117Copyright © Королева Д.О., Андреева А.А., Хавенсон Т.Е., 20252025Королева Д.О., Андреева А.А., Хавенсон Т.Е.Koroleva D., Andreeva A., Khavenson T.Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.https://kvmolur.elpub.ru/jour/article/view/91

Данная статья рассматривает процесс перехода на дистанционное обучение в контексте пандемии COVID-19 как инновацию и показывает, что экстремально быстрый характер распространения инноваций в контексте перехода на дистанционное обучение не соответствует классической модели диффузии инноваций Э. Роджерса. По результатам анализа авторы дополняют теорию инновации специфической моделью шоковых инноваций, описывающей феномен одномоментных трансформаций. Для этого подробное описание процесса диффузии инноваций было сужено до трех основных характеристик и разложено на трехуровневую модель (микро-, мезо- и макроуровень). Выделенные из собранных интервью (N=10) нарративы директоров российских школ, раскрывающих инновационные процессы в момент перехода на дистанционное обучение, сопоставлены со свойствами этой трехуровневой модели. Было выявлено, что шоковая инновация характеризуется тем, что 1) изначальный импульс имеет внешний для системы источник, 2) требует обязательной реакции (вынужденного изменения); 3) проявляется в инновационном «рывке» за счет экстремальной мобилизации ресурсов и 4) в «уплотнении» традиционных инновационных процессов распространения инновации на трех уровнях – индивидуальном (микро), групповом (мезо) и системном (макро). Раздел дискуссии раскрывает аспекты, в которых выявленные характеристики инновационного процесса в момент экстренного перехода на дистанционное обучение должны быть учтены при планировании развития школ и заполнении дефицитов образовательной системы, порожденных вызовами пандемии.

The article considers the transition to distance learning in the context of COVID-19 pandemic as innovation. In particular, it shows that the spread of innovation in an extremely fast and compressed way does not fit the classical model of innovation diffusion by Rogers. Based on the results of the analysis, the authors supplement the innovation theory with a model of shock innovation which aims to describe the phenomenon of momentary transformations. For that reason, a comprehensive and extensive description of innovation diffusion was narrowed down to three key characteristics and linked to three levels (micro-, meso- and macro-). The narratives of school principals which have been extracted from the interviews (N=10) were compared with the characteristics of this three-levels model. The analysis revealed that a shock innovation is characterized by the fact that (1) the initial impulse has a source, external to the system, (2) requiring an obligatory response (forced change); (3) manifested by an innovative “breakthrough” due to the extreme mobilization of the resources; and (4) “densification” of traditional innovative processes for the diffusion of innovation at three levels - individual (micro), group (meso-) and systemic (macro-). The discussion highlights the aspects of the identified characteristics that should be taken into account in designing the strategies of schools’ development, as well as bridging the gaps in the educational system caused by the pandemic.

инновациятеория диффузии инновацийцифровизация образованияконцептуализация процессов пандемиидистанционное обучениешоковая инновациятрехуровневая модель диффузии инновацийРоджерсshock innovationdiffusion of innovations theorydigitalization of educationconceptual framework of COVID-19 in educationdistance learningИсследование выполнено при финансовой поддержке РФФИ в рамках научно го проекта № 20-311-90082ReferencesАбанкина, И. А., Вавилова, А. А., Зиньковский, К. В., Семенова, К. А., Суркова, Н. Е. Цыплят по осени считают: уроки COVID-19 для школ. – М.: НИУ ВШЭ, 2020. – 52 с.Abankina, I., Vavilova, A., Zinkovsky, K., Semenova, K., & Surkova, N. (2020). Don't count your chickens before they hatch: COVID-19 lessons for schools. NRU HSE Publ.Звягинцев, Р. С., Керша, Ю. Д., Пинская, М. А. Переход на дистанционное образование: детальный разбор муниципального кейса // Современная аналитика образования. –2020. – №5. – 21 с.Agyei, D. D., & Voogt, J. M. (2011). Exploring the potential of the will, skill, tool model in Ghana: Predicting prospective and practicing teachers’ use of technology. Computers & Education, 56(1), 91-100. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.017Ильин, В. И. Драматургия качественного полевого исследования. – СПб.: Интерсоцис, 2006. – 255 с.Aubusson, P. J., Harrison, A. G., & Ritchie, S. M. (2006). Metaphor and analogy. In Metaphor and analogy in science education (pp. 1-10). Springer.Косарецкий, С. Г. и др. Прогнозируемые потери для школьного образования из-за пандемии COVID-19: оценки и поиск способов компенсации. – М.: НИУ ВШЭ, 2020. – 40 с.Azorín, C. (2020). Beyond COVID-19 supernova. Is another education coming? Journal of Professional Capital and Community, 5(3/4), 381-390. https://doi.org/10.1108/JPCC-05-2020-0019Министерство просвещения РФ. Об утверждении временного порядка сопровождения реализации образовательных программ начального общего, основного общего, среднего общего образования, образовательных программ среднего профессионального образования и дополнительных общеобразовательных программ с применением электронного обучения и дистанционных образовательных технологий: приказ М-ва просвещения Российской Федерации от 17.03.2020 № 103 // Официальный сайт Министерства просвещения РФ [Электронный ресурс]. – URL: https://docs.edu.gov.ru/document/d8273e59ca68baf01b8a30ad3fe33ee8Christensen, C., & Eyring, H. (2011). The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. John Wiley & Sons.Назаров, В. Л., Жердев, Д. В., Авербух, Н. В. Шоковая цифровизация образования: восприятие участников образовательного процесса // Образование и наука. – 2021. – №. 1. – С. 156-201. – DOI:10.17853/1994-5639-2021-1-156-201Cros, F. (2018). Innovation and society. Wiley-ISTE. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119492221Сапрыкина, Д. И., Волохович, А. А. Проблемы перехода на дистанционное обучение в Российской Федерации глазами учителей // Факты образования. – 2020. – №4 (29). – 32 с.Davis, B. (2019, January 22). How long does digital transformation take? Econsultancy. https://econsultancy.com/how-long-does-digital-transformation-take-timescale/Уваров, А. Ю., Семенов, А. Л. Тридцать лет – это все-таки мало // Информатика и образование. – 2015. – № 7. – С. 6-8.Essmann, H., & Du Preez, N. (2009). An innovation capability maturity model–development and initial application. World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology, 53(1), 435-446.Карлов, И. А., Киясов, Н. М., Ковалев, В. О., Кожевников, Н. А., Патаракин, Е. Д., Фрумин, И. Д., Швиндт, А. Н., Шонов, Д. О. Анализ цифровых образовательных ресурсов и сервисов для организации учебного процесса школ. – М.: НИУ ВШЭ, 2020. – 72 с.Karlov, I. A., Kiyassov, N. M., Kovalev, V. O., Kozhevnikov, N. A., Patarakin, E. D., Frumin, I. D., Shvindt, A. N., & Shonov, D. O. (2020). Analysis of digital learning resources and services for organizing secondary school educational processes. HSE Press.Agyei, D. D., Voogt, J. M. Exploring the potential of the will, skill, tool model in Ghana: Predicting prospective and practicing teachers’ use of technology // Computers & Education. – 2011. – Vol. 56. – No. 1. – P. 91-100. – DOI: 10.1016/j.compedu.2010.08.017Fuglsang, L., & Sundbo, J. (Eds.). (2002). Innovation as Strategic Reflexivity. Routledge.Aubusson, P. J., Harrison, A. G., Ritchie, S. M. Metaphor and analogy // Metaphor and analogy in science education. – Springer, 2006. – P. 1-9.Fuller, C. (2020). Education Innovation Clusters: Supporting transformative teaching and learning. Childhood Education, 96(1), 34-47. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2020.1707534Azorín, C. Beyond COVID-19 supernova. Is another education coming? //Journal of Professional Capital and Community. – 2020. – Vol. 5. – No3/4. – P. 381-390. – DOI:10.1108/JPCC-05-2020-0019Gabby, S., Avargil, S., Herscovitz, O., & Dori, Y. J. (2017). The case of middle and high school chemistry teachers implementing technology: Using the concerns-based adoption model to assess change processes. Chemistry Education Research and Practice, 18(1), 214-232. https://doi.org/10.1039/C6RP00193AChristensen, C. M., Eyring, H. J. The innovative university: Changing the DNA of higher education from the inside out. – John Wiley & Sons, 2011. – 512 P.Hadar, L., Ergas, O., Alpert, B., & Ariav, T. (2020). Rethinking teacher education in a VUCA world: student teachers’ social-emotional competencies during the Covid-19 crisis. European Journal of Teacher Education, 43(4), 573-586. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2020.1807513Cros, F. Innovation and society. – London: Wiley-ISTE. – 2018. – 224 p. – DOI: 10.1002/9781119492221Ilin, V. (2006). Dramaturgy of qualitative field research. Intersocis.Davis, B. How long does digital transformation take? [Electronic resource]. – 2019. – URL: https://econsultancy.com/how-long-does-digital-transformation-take-timescale/Khavenson, T., Kotik, N., & Koroleva, D. (2020). Digital technological readiness of schoolteachers. Monitoring of Education Markets and Organizations, 8, 1-16.Essmann, H., Du Preez, N. An innovation capability maturity model–development and initial application // World Academy of Science, Engineering and Technology. – 2009. – Vol. 53. – No. 1. – P. 435-446.Koroleva, D., & Simpson, A. (2018). Coup D’etat in the Panopticon: Social Networking in Education. In L. Benade, & M. Jackson (Eds), Transforming Education (pp. 213-225). Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5678-9_14Fuglsang, L., Sundbo, J. Innovation as strategic reflexivity. – Routledge, 2002. – 304 P.Kosaretsky, S. (Ed). (2020.). The COVID-19 pandemic losses for education: Forecasts and search for ways of compensation. NRU HSE Publ.Fuller, C. Education Innovation Clusters: Supporting transformative teaching and learning // Childhood Education. – 2020. – Vol. 96. – No. 1. – P. 34-47. – DOI:10.1080/00094056.2020.1707534Leydesdorff, L. (2000). The triple helix: an evolutionary model of innovations. Research policy, 29(2), 243-255.Gabby, S., Avargil, S., Herscovitz, O., Dori, Y. J. The case of middle and high school chemistry teachers implementing technology: Using the concerns-based adoption model to assess change processes // Chemistry Education Research and Practice. – 2017. – Vol. 18. – No. 1. – P. 214-232. – DOI: 10.1039/C6RP00193ALuik, P., & Lepp, M. (2021). Local and External Stakeholders Affecting Educational Change during the Coronavirus Pandemic: A Study of Facebook Messages in Estonia. Education Sciences, 11(3). https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci11030113Hadar, L., Ergas, O., Alpert, B., Ariav, T. Rethinking teacher education in a VUCA world: student teachers’ social-emotional competencies during the Covid-19 crisis // European Journal of Teacher Education. – 2020. – Vol. 43. – No. 4. – P. 573-586. – DOI:10.1080/02619768.2020.1807513Ministry of Education of the Russian Education (2020). On approval of the temporary procedure for supporting the implementation of educational programs of primary general, basic general, secondary general education, educational programs of secondary vocational education and additional general education programs using e-learning and distance learning technologies. Order No. 103, 17th March. https://docs.edu.gov.ru/document/750dd535d2c38b2a15cd47c9ea44086e/Khavenson, T., Kotik, N., Korolieva, D. Digital technological readiness of school teachers // Monitoring of Education Markets and Organizations (MEMO). – 2020. – No. 8. – P. 1-6.Nazarov, V. L., Zherdev, D. V., & Averbukh, N. V. (2021). Shock digitalisation of education: The perception of participants of the educational process. Obrazovanie i nauka – The Education and Science Journal, 23(1), 156-201. https://doi.org/10.17853/1994-5639-2021-1-156-201Koroleva, D., Simpson, A. Coup D’etat in the Panopticon: Social Networking in Education / ed. by L. Benade, M. Jackson // Transforming Education. – 2018. – Springer. – P. 213-225.– DOI:10.1007/978-981-10-5678-9_14Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Kopcha, T. J., & Ertmer, P. A. (2018). Information and communication technology dispositional factors and relationship to information and communication technology practices. In Voogt J., Knezek G., Christensen R., Lai KW. (Eds.), Handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 309-333). Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-53803-7_27-1Leydesdorff, L. The triple helix: an evolutionary model of innovations // Research policy. – 2000. – Vol. 29. –No. 2. – P. 243-255.Parasuraman, A. (2000). Technology Readiness Index (TRI) a multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies. Journal of service research, 2(4), 307-320. https://doi.org/10.1177/109467050024001Luik, P., Lepp, M. Local and External Stakeholders Affecting Educational Change during the Coronavirus Pandemic: A Study of Facebook Messages in Estonia // Education Sciences. – 2021. – Vol. 11. – No. 3. – DOI:10.3390/educsci11030113Rallis, K., Barton, J., & Round, J. (2020). Tip #13 – Innovate, learn from others, and keep innovating. Practical tips for supporting competency-based medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic. Medical Teacher, 42(11), 1316-1317. https://doi.org/10.1080/0142159X.2020.1813878Ottenbreit-Leftwich, A. T., Kopcha, T. J., Ertmer, P. A. Information and communication technology dispositional factors and relationship to information and communication technology practices / ed. by Voogt J., Knezek G., Christensen R., Lai KW // Second handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education. – Springer – 2018. – P. 309-333. – DOI:10.1007/978-3-319-53803-7_27-1Rogers, E. M. (2003). Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). Free Press.Parasuraman, A. Technology Readiness Index (TRI) a multiple-item scale to measure readiness to embrace new technologies // Journal of service research. – 2000. – Vol. 2. – No. 4. – P. 307-320. – DOI:10.1177/109467050024001Saprykina, D., & Volohovich, A. (2020). Problems of transition to distance learning in the Russian Federation through the eyes of teachers. Fakty obrazovaniya, 4(29), 1-32.Rallis, K., Barton, J., Round, J. Tip #13 – Innovate, learn from others, and keep innovating. Practical tips for supporting competency-based medical education during the COVID-19 pandemic // Medical Teacher. – 2020. – Vol. 42. – No. 11. – P. 1316-1317. – DOI:10.1080/0142159X.2020.1813878Serdyukov, P. (2017). Innovation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it? Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning, 10(1), 4-33. https://doi.org/10.1108/JRIT-10-2016-0007Rogers, E. M. Diffusion of innovations (5th ed.). – Free Press, 2003. – 576 p.Siegel, A. A., Zarb, M., Alshaigy, B., Blanchard, J., Crick, T., Glassey, R., Hott, J., Latulipe C., Riedesel C., Senapathi M. & Williams, D. (2021). Educational Landscapes During and After COVID-19. In Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 2 (pp. 597-598). Association for Computing Machinery. https://doi.org/10.1145/3456565.3461439Serdyukov, P. Innovation in education: what works, what doesn’t, and what to do about it? // Journal of Research in Innovative Teaching & Learning. – 2017. – Vol. 10 – No. 1. – P. 4-33. – DOI:10.1108/JRIT-10-2016-0007Soudien, C. (2020). Systemic shock: How Covid-19 exposes our learning challenges in education. Southern African Review of Education with Education with Production, 26(1), 6-19.Siegel, A., Zarb, M., Alshaigy, B., Blanchard, J., Crick, T., Glassey, R., Hott, J., Latulipe, C., Riedesel, C., Senapathi, M., Williams, D. Educational Landscapes During and After COVID-19 // Proceedings of the 26th ACM Conference on Innovation and Technology in Computer Science Education V. 2. – 2021. – P. 597-598. – DOI:10.1145/3456565.3461439Thomas, D., Lazarova, M., & Inkson, K. (2005). Global careers: New phenomenon or new perspectives? Journal of World Business, 40(4), 340-347. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jwb.2005.08.002Soudien, C. Systemic shock: How Covid-19 exposes our learning challenges in education // Southern African Review of Education with Education with Production. – 2020. – Vol. 26. – No. 1. – P. 6-19.Thomke, S. H. (2003). Experimentation matters: unlocking the potential of new technologies for innovation. Harvard Business Press.Thomas, D., Lazarova, M., Inkson, K. Global careers: New phenomenon or new perspectives? // Journal of World Business. – 2005. – Vol. 40. – No. 4. – P. 340-347. –DOI:10.1016/j.jwb.2005.08.002Uvarov, A. U., & Semenov, A. L. (2015). Thirty years is still not enough. Informatica i obrazovanie - Informatics and Education, 7, 6-8.Thomke, S. H. Experimentation matters: unlocking the potential of new technologies for innovation. – Harvard Business Press, 2003. – 320 p.Varpio, L., Paradis, E., Uijtdehaage, S., & Young, M. (2020). The distinctions between theory, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework. Academic Medicine, 95(7), 989-994. https://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0000000000003075Varpio, L., Paradis, E., Uijtdehaage, S., & Young, M. The distinctions between theory, theoretical framework, and conceptual framework // Academic Medicine. – 2020. – Vol. 95. – No. 7. – P. 989-994. – DOI: 10.1097/ACM.0000000000003075Xie, X., Siau, K., & Nah, F. F. H. (2020). COVID-19 pandemic–online education in the new normal and the next normal. Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research, 22(3), 175-187. https://doi.org/10.1080/15228053.2020.1824884Xie, X., Siau, K., Nah, F. F. H. COVID-19 pandemic–online education in the new normal and the next normal. // Journal of Information Technology Case and Application Research. – 2020. – Vol. 22. – No. 3. – P. 175-187. – DOI:10.1080/15228053.2020.1824884Xue, E., Li, J., Li, T., & Shang, W. (2020). China’s education response to COVID-19: A perspective of policy analysis. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 53(9), 881-893. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131857.2020.1793653Xue, E., Li, J., Li, T., Shang, W. China’s education response to COVID-19: A perspective of policy analysis //Educational Philosophy and Theory. – 2020. – Vol. 53. – No. 9. – P. 881-893. – DOI:10.1080/00131857.2020.1793653Zvyagintsev, R., Kersha, Y., & Pinskaya, M. (2020). Transition to distance learning: detailed review of a case from one region. Sovremennaya analitika obrazovaniya – Special Issue, 5, 1-21.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.